I couldn't have said this better/ Thanks to CIM for this, this credit goes to U

Thanksgiving has a lot of meaning to us. The most important should be to you and your family. Remember Family and Friends comes first! When reflecting on this day remember that you work with a lot of Brothers and Sisters that would give their lives for the cause. And these same folks would never leave you behind in a time of crisis.

It's to bad we have a Governor that gets to spend his day at his mansion in Brentwood while so many of us our forced to work our shifts plus the shift of a partner that didn't come to work today. In the past if you were force to be away from your family on a holiday at least you could look forward to a little extra money in the form of holiday pay. But our Governor decided that we no longer should receive holiday pay, and hence our partners have no incentive to come to work today.

Partners hope were ever you are whether it be humping the tiers in Central or walking the yard at East, or dealing with the activation of YTS, or hearing the whining little darlings of MSF, that you take the time to say thanks on this day.

I'm hoping that there is a Judge in Alameda County that gives us thanks. And Governor while your enjoying your "day off", I do wish your family a Happy Thanksgiving!

God Bless my Brothers in Green! 
Happy Thanksgiving

CA Bureau of State Audits' review of CDCR spending of federal stimulus (inflated job saving claims, etc)

November 23, 2009 2009-002.1b

(Letter Report)

 

The Governor of California

President pro Tempore of the Senate

Speaker of the Assembly

State Capitol

Sacramento, California 95814

 

Dear Governor and Legislative Leaders:

 

On February 17, 2009, the President signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

of 2009 (Recovery Act) to help fight the negative effects of the United States’economic recession.  California expects to receive $85 billion in additional federal funding over the next several years for both new and existing federal programs. With this increased funding comes a renewed emphasis on accountability and public transparency to ensure federal funds are spent properly.  A key component of such accountability and transparency is the California State Auditor’s Office (State Auditor’s Office) annual report oninternal control and compliance with federal laws and regulations. The State Auditor’s Office conducts this audit in accordance with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133.

 

With the federal government awarding Recovery Act funds beginning in 2009, OMB issued

guidance dated June 2009 indicating the importance of an auditor’s early communication

to management regarding deficiencies in internal control. By recommending such early

communication, OMB intends for states to correct these findings as soon as possible to ensure proper accountability and transparency for expenditures of Recovery Act awards.

Based on OMB’s guidance, as well as the public’s right to full transparency over the State’s spending of Recovery Act funds, the State Auditor will be issuinginterim reports that identify areas where the State can improve its administration of Recovery Act funds, while also recognizing instances when such funds were spent properly.

 

In this interim report, the State Auditor’s Office discusses the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation’s (Corrections) administration of a portion of the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program—Government Services (Stabilization Funds—Federal Catalog Number 84.397) during fiscal year 2008–09. Our review found that Corrections spent its entire $726.8 million award to reimburse the General Fund for payroll expenses incurred during May and June 2009. Corrections’ use of these funds in this manner is consistent with the Recovery Act’s goals, which state that one of its main purposes is to preserve and create jobs, while other goals include assisting those most affected by the recession and stabilizing state and local government budgets. Also, according to the requirements for the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program, certain stabilization funds can be used for public safety.

 

Corrections’ Use of Stabilization Funds to Reimburse Its Payroll Costs

Was Appropriate

 

The Recovery Act provides the U.S. Department of Education (Education) with $53.6 billion to administer the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program. Under this program, Education can allocate funding to the states to support education and other governmental programs. The Recovery Act requires states to spend 81.8 percent of their allocation to support elementary, secondary, andpostsecondary education, while spending the remaining 18.2 percent of their allocation for public safety and other governmental services, which may include assistance for educational programs. In April 2009 the State applied for initial

funding under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program. In the State’s application, the governor indicated that California would use the government services portion of its allocation by spending it all on public safety, rather than spending these funds in other areas such as transportation, public school renovation, or Medicaid. By mid-June 2009, the State had received more than $2.8 billion in stabilization funds, of which $726.8 million could be used for public safety and other government services.

 

The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (Planning and Research) entered into an interagency agreement with Corrections on May 6, 2009, to expend federal funds in a manner consistent  with the public safety and other government services provision

outlined in the State’s April 2009 application. Even though the agreement specified that Corrections would be spending the funds received by Planning and Research, the State’s intention was to use these funds to reimburse the General Fund, which is the funding source for Corrections’ payroll costs. Earlier in April 2009 the Department of Finance informed the Legislature that “the Administration intends to use the federal funds to replace General Fund expenditures of an equal amount in the budget of the California Department of Corrections (CDCR).”

 

In May 2009 Corrections submitted an invoice to Planning and Research for $450 million. Corrections submitted a second invoice in June 2009 for $276.8 million. Although Corrections’ invoices did not identify which General Fund costs were being reimbursed with

stabilization funds, Corrections did provide us with accounting records demonstrating that its payroll costs exceeded the amounts invoiced. We verified the accuracy of Corrections’ accounting records by comparing them with similar records at the State Controller’s Office.

 

Corrections’ decision to use $726.8 million of State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program funds ($450 million in May and $276.8 million in June 2009) to reimburse portions of its payroll

costs is consistent with the federal government’s requirement that these funds be spent on public safety or other governmental services. In fact, neither the Recovery Act nor the terms of the grant agreement further define the term public safety.

 

Corrections’ mission is to enhance public safety through safe and secure incarceration of offenders, effective parole supervision, and rehabilitative strategies to reintegrate offenders into our communities. Given its public safety mission, Corrections’ decision to spend Recovery Act funds on its payroll costs is an allowable use of funds.

 

Corrections May Have Overstated the Number of Jobs It Retained

Using Stabilization Funds

 

Section 1512 of the Recovery Act requires recipients of Recovery Act funds to report quarterly on the use of those funds. OMB issued guidance in June 2009, indicating that such reporting

would begin with the quarter ending September 30, 2009, and clarified that recipients under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program are subject to this reporting requirement. Among the items to be reported is an estimate of the jobs created or retained by the project or activity paid for with State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program funds. In its report submitted in October 2009 Corrections indicated that it used $1.08 billion ($726.8 million received during fiscal year 2008–09 and $358 million received in fiscal year 2009–10) to retain the jobs of 18,229 correctional officers working in adult prison facilities located throughout the

State. Specifically, Corrections reported that it used the funds for payroll expenses. 

 

Federal guidelines do not currently require, nor did we, audit the information recipients must report under Section 1512. Since Corrections submitted its first Section 1512 report on October 6, 2009, our subsequent audit of fiscal year 2009–10 expenditures of federal funds will likely examine these reports in more detail. Nevertheless, in keeping with OMB’s  emphasis on early communication of issues to management, we conducted a high level review of the methodology that Corrections used to report the number of jobs it retained using stabilization funds. Based on our preliminary review, we believe that Corrections may have overstated how many jobs it retained when it reported its 18,229 figure to the federal government.

 

For the purposes of Section 1512 reporting, the federal government defines jobs retained as an existing position that would not have been continued to be filled were it not for Recovery Act funding.  Corrections had issued 3,655 layoff notices on May 15, 2009, roughly one week before it received its first $450 million in stabilization funds. Various media reports indicated that Corrections issued between 1,300 and 1,450 additional layoff notices in August 2009, bringing its total layoff notices to approximately 5,000.  As a result, the total number of layoff notices Corrections issued is less  than one-third of the 18,229 figure that it reported to the federal  government as jobs retained.   Corrections explained that it had calculated its 18,229 figure by using the mid-step salary range for acorrectional officer, excluding additional overtime payments or benefits related to the position. However, such a methodology for calculating jobs retained does not seem consistent with the federal government’s definition of this term, since it appears that Corrections simply reported how many correctional officers’ salaries were paid with Recovery Act funding, regardless of whether these positions were truly at risk of being eliminated without federal funding.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

ELAINE M. HOWLE, CPA

State Auditor

 

FOR OUR TROOPS.................

We know how it is to do a thankless job.  Please take the few minutes to look at the link and send a message to our Troops during the holidays.   Dave Lopez    XEROX IS DOING SOMETHING COOL If you go to this web site, www.LetsSayThanks.com   you can pick out a thank you card and Xerox will print it and it will be sent to a soldier that is currently serving in Iraq . You can't pick out who gets it, but it will go to a member of the armed services. How AMAZING it would be if we could get everyone we know to send one!!!    It is FREE and it only takes a second. Wouldn't it be wonderful if the soldiers received a bunch of these?    Whether you are for or against the war, our soldiers over there need to know we are behind them. This takes just 10 seconds and it's a wonderful way to say thank you.    Please take the time and please take the time to pass it on for others to do.  We can never say enough thank you's. Thanks for taking to time to support our military!

Don’t Forget Where You Came From

By B-Polished
DVI Blog

The last couple of years I have seen a lot of co-workers promote. Some went from Sergeant to Lieutenant. Others took their first step into the supervisory pool to make Sergeant and even a few took a further leap of faith and joined the ranks of administration. For most of them I am happy to see them climb the ranks because they deserve it. They did their time in the trenches and remained level headed about the job that needs to be done. They witnessed the void of the supervisory staff that lacked the common knowledge to be effective and wanted to make a difference in a more positive way than what was done before. So to those who have proven themselves to have the knowledge and the ambition to stretch their necks out further and join the higher ranks I applaud you and wish you the best?

But that’s not who I want to focus on today. There is a smaller group of supervisors that we have. They exist in every institution and wreak havoc wherever they are. Some have been a C/O for some time, others have not. Both do not have the common sense to fill an inmate lunch bag. These supervisors that I comment on have created more drama among staff than most inmate conspiracies. The reason behind it is not only the lack of common sense but also because of a superiority complex that they take on once they sew on those chevrons and remove themselves from the rank and file. Another reason is that they don’t listen or learn from the line staff with superior seniority, knowledge and experience when given suggestions on how to better a situation going bad. Some of these ambitious supervisors have been blinded to the point that they can no longer remember that they were once officers (if they ever were officers) and don’t mind reaching their positions while stepping on the backs of others. Even though this is commonly encouraged by CDCr and Administration, I personally believe it shows how shallow one is if they can only promote by burning other co-workers. Someone once said ‘The ones you exploit on the way up are the same ones who will stand by and watch you fall’.

It’s not entirely all their fault. CDCr encourages all to seek promotion once the probationary period is over. Lately many officers have joined the ranks of Sergeant with less than 5 years in as an officer. Now depending on the personal experiences of where you have worked that may not be a bad thing. One can gain a massive amount of experience that could qualify them ready to promote if they weren’t coddled or ‘taken care of’. It was once an unwritten rule by most line staff not to promote until they hit 5 years on the job as a C/O. Now it’s about advancing as fast as possible without gaining experience or knowledge to back the position. You may earn the position because you have the book smarts and can test well, but do you hold the common sense of how to react in the middle of an incident or dealing with an unruly inmate? Some things can’t be taught from a book.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t have a personal axe to grind with any particular supervisor. I, myself, took the sergeants exam, and received letters to interview, but decided not to promote because it was not the best move for me at this time. I enjoy being a (so called) senior officer on the line for right now. What I do have a problem with is the ignorant ideology of supervisors, at any rank, who look at line staff as worthless and expendable unless they promote.

Guess what… Line officers keep this boat floating! We report the vital information. We respond to the emergencies and incidences. We maintain the day in and day out programs while YOU second guess our decisions when you weren’t even there. You don’t even have a clue on what we deal with to keep the program moving while performing the dozens of responsibilities you expect us to complete and you have no idea what it takes to complete them! We are not your lap dogs. As I once told a supervisor, “I look good ‘cause I make my sergeant look good”. I have respect from my supervisors because they know I will do the job. I may not agree, and they may have to listen to me bitch, but I do the job. No one wants to look bad and if my supervisors look bad, that reflects on me and my performance. I was brought up with the ideology that your work will speak for itself and it will reflect on how your co-workers and supervisors rely, respect and treat you.

So to those who want to promote or have promoted recently, I have some words of advice:
Know and listen to your line staff. If they are seasoned or have a solid reputation, they just may know what they speak about. Most of them will help without question because it’s their job. Again, if you look good, they look good.
Every tire has the possibility to go flat, so be careful what car you ride in. Everyone wants to be accepted but be strong enough to ride alone. You have a less chance of getting thrown under a bus that way.
Last, but most important…Don’t forget where you came from. Most supervisors began as an officer. The ones who have the most respect have changed positions but not their personalities. I’m just sayin…

Retired C/O speaks about Patton cuts, CRC

 

Closer look warranted

Posted: 11/18/2009 06:53:02 PM PST

 

On June 4, 1983, after escaping the minimum-security yard of the California Institution for Men, inmate David Trautman murdered three members of the Ryen family and 11-year-old Chris Hughes with a hatchet.

 

What was unknown until then was that David Trautman was an aka for Kevin Cooper, an escaped patient of the Mayview State Hospital, a mental institution in Pennsylvania.

 

Many of the inmates of Patton State Hospital are capable of murder (Re: "Safety at Patton disputed").

 

I worked at Patton for 26 years as a correctional officer and I've seen changes initiated by the California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) administration in Norco and the Department of Mental Health at Patton that the surrounding community knows nothing about.

 

Due to the Coleman v. Schwarzenegger decision, the hospital is mandated by court order to improve medical care for the patients. It's commonplace for three or four ambulances to be called on grounds at roughly the same time for patient transport to local hospitals, each one requiring coverage by armed correctional officers and a chase vehicle, as perCalifornia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) operational policy. This necessitates that management pull officers from perimeter fence coverage to accompany the ambulances and operate the chase vehicles.

 

On more than three dozen occasions, I saw management vacate four or five perimeter posts at the same time, often during nighttime hours, leaving hundreds of yards ofperimeter fence line unattended for several hours or more.

 

Patton executive director Octavio Luna and the CRC administration are well aware of this ongoing situation. Eliminating 13 officers and returning them to CRC only makes the job more difficult for the correctional officers at Patton, further jeopardizes the surrounding community to potential escapees and invites a closer look.

 

MARK MANZANO

Highland

 

Editor's note: The author is a retired correctional officer who worked at Patton State Hospital.

Sergeant Fired

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Inside Barber Jon's in Folsom, apprentice Aaron Ralls learns a trade he never thought he'd be doing. Ralls is without a job because, he said, he tried to save a life inside California State Prison, Sacramento. "Two years ago, I thought I would have been a lieutenant by now," Ralls said. In April 2007, Ralls, then a six-year correction sergeant, was responding to an inmate attempting to swallow an unknown object. "I grabbed him around his lower jaw area to keep in from swallowing up what ever he was trying to swallow. For seven seconds. After that, I let him go," he said. According to state records, Ralls was fired for using "excessive force on an inmate," "failing to document his use of force in hisincident report," and attempting to "conceal his own improper actions" by telling officers to change their incident reports. "It angers me -- none of that happened at all," Ralls said. Ralls admits only to correcting an officer's wording, but not changing witness accounts. "Yes, I did correct some reports, but that was my job as a sergeant. We review every report ... countless grammatical errors andsentence structures that didn't make since," he said. In June, a judge with the California Personnel Board heard Ralls' case and came to the conclusion Ralls was guilty of "inexcusable neglect of duty," "dishonesty," and "failure of good behavior." But that same judge overturned the state's decision to fire him and said Ralls' conduct warrants a demotion to "position of correctional officer" -- but not firing. Five months later, after two appeals, he's still not allowed back to work. "I have no idea why I have not been back to work, why I have not been given my back pay," he said. Despite some apprehension about returning to the same job site, Ralls is pressing forward. He's taking his case to Superior Court to get his job back. A hearing is set for Thursday afternoon. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation did not give an interview on the matter, simply responding that "personnel matters are confidential and are protected from disclosure."

CAL PERS, GOVERNOR GOING AFTER.........?

Pension initiative cuts benefits, voters can alter

By Ed Mendel

An initiative filed last week would cut pensions for new state and local government hires, but allow local voters to lift the cap.

The initiative sponsors said they will poll voters to see if the pension cuts imposed by the initiative, filed in two versions, should be altered by a majority or a two-thirds vote.

The local option emerged from meetings with groups of city managers in Los Angeles and San Diego counties, said Marcia Fritz, president of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility.

“You can change anything, but you have to have voter approval,” Fritz said. “It’s getting back to square one and getting the voters involved … that removes those closed-door sessions.”

Pension benefits are typically set in labor contract negotiations with public employee unions.

In recent years San Diego and Orange Counties, both hit by increasing pension costs, passed measures that require voters to approve pension benefit increases. San Francisco has a similar century-old requirement.

Local officials want to be able to raise benefits, if need be, to recruit and retain valuable employees. But competition among local governments is said by some to escalate pension benefits.

The initiative aimed at the November ballot next year would make major pension cuts and extend retirement dates for persons hired after June 30, 2011, by the state, cities, counties, school districts, universities and special districts.

“The current system could result in billions of dollars in new taxes to meet the retirement obligations for public employees,” says the initiative. “Many local governments may be threatened with bankruptcy if no change is made.”

The issue of whether the current level of public pension benefits are “sustainable” has been growing, fueled by an historic stock market crash last fall that is expected to force increases in annual government pension payments to replenish retirement funds.

Critics point to a round of benefit increases that began a decade ago when the stock market was booming. Investment earnings, which have been providing 75 percent of the revenue of some pension systems, were expected to pay for the new benefits.

One of the increases allows many police and firefighters to retire at age 50 with 3 percent of their final salary for each year served. The initiative gives new police and firefighters 2.3 percent at age 58.

Many miscellaneous workers can now retire at 55 with 2.5 percent of pay for each year served. The initiative formula is 1.25 percent at age 67 for workers also receiving Social Security, and 1.65 percent if they do not receive Social Security.

Fritz said the basic concept is to make the pensions a “floor” for retirement, supplemented by Social Security and individual investment accounts. Workers could still take early retirement, but their pensions would be reduced.

“I think we are ahead of the world with the policy of working longer,” said Fritz, referring to longer life expectancy. “I think it’s inevitable. I think entire countries are going to go to this — France, Germany.”

Fritz said cutting retirement costs also can “motivate production” by making money available for bonuses and salary increases. She said a recent pension proposal in Southern California would have created a pool of money to reward increased production

The founder of the group now led by Fritz, former Assemblyman Keith Richman, R-Northridge, proposed a plan in 2005 to switch all new state and local government hires to 401(k)-style individual investment plans.

Public employee unions said the proposal would eliminate disability and survivor benefits. A hard-hitting television ad campaign helped cause Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to drop his support for the measure.

The Richman group, which said the charge was bogus and even if true easily correctable, is taking no chances this time. The new initiative says death and disability benefits would not be eliminated.

The tax-deferred 401(k) investment plan is now widespread in the private sector, where pensions are rapidly disappearing. The “defined contribution” plans give employers a simple annual payment, creating no decades-long debt for pensions.

But for employees the stock market crash last fall dramatized that 401(k) plans were originally intended to be a supplement, not a basic retirement plan. Persons nearing retirement have little time to rebuild theirinvestment funds.

Fritz, a former 401(k) advocate, now thinks that “defined benefit” pension plans, with their monthly payments guaranteed for life, are a low-cost and efficient way to provide public employee retirement benefits, if properly designed.

“We have a very good system for defined benefit administration and investing already set up,” she said. “I don’t think we should throw it away.”

The foundation led by Fritz filed a similar initiative two years ago, but was unable to gather the voter signatures needed to place the measure on the ballot.

Fritz is looking into whether signatures can be gathered via the Internet. In her last conversation with the secretary of state’s office, she was told that each page of a downloaded petition may have to be signed.

The foundation also plans to seek support from Schwarzenegger and financial backing from two wealthy Republican candidates for governor, Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner.

“I honestly think this is going to be a divisive issue for the governor’s race,” said Fritz.

She said many local government retirement systems will face crash-driven increases in their pension costs next year. The 1,500 local systems in the giant Public Employees Retirement System do not face increases until 2011.

CalPERS has already “smoothed” the local government increases, pushing some costs into the future. No decision has been made about pension costs next year for the state, which faces another massive budget deficit.

Public employee unions are expected to mount a well-funded opposition campaign if the initiative is placed on the ballot.

In a preliminary briefing last week, the board of the California State Teachers Retirement System was told that the initiative would cut the pension of a teacher retiring at age 62 by more than half.

It should be called “The Pension Destruction Act,” said one board member. “The Teacher Poverty Act,” said another.

“There is no question there is a problem,” said Fritz, “and we have a solution. If they stop our solution, then they are the ones that have to be accountable.”

Reporter Ed Mendel covered the Capitol in Sacramento for nearly three decades, most recently for the San Diego Union-Tribune. More stories are at http://calpensions.com/ Posted 10 Nov 09