Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2016-06-24TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST Tune 20-24, 2016 TIBURON Correspondence, Notices and other Information 1. Letter - June 16 - Grand Jury Report: Law Enforcement Citizen Complaint Procedures: The Grand Jury has a few Complaints 2. Letter - June 16 - Grand Jury Report: Marin's Hidden Human Sex Trafficking Challenge: It's Happening In Our Backyard 3. Letter - June 17 - Richardson's Bay Regional Agency Fiscal Year 2016-17 Member Dues 4. Letter - June 22 - Resident complaint about Blackies Pasture Project Staging 5. Letter - June 22 - Invitation to participate in Labor Day Parade - The Ranch Agenda, Minutes 1. Agenda - June 28 - Heritage and Arts Commission regular meeting REGIONAL, NOTICES AND AGENDA Correspondence, Notices and other Information 1. Notice - June 15 - PG&E Request to change rates and return revenues Agenda, Minutes 1. Agenda - June 8 - Tiburon Fire Protection Agency tawrc a nuor+ Marin County Civil Grand Jury 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 275 San Rafael, CA 94903 Tel. 415-473-6132 Date: June 16, 2016 Mayor Erin Tollini Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 DIGEST CONFIDENTIAL c �' Grand Jury Report: Law Enforcement Citizen Complaint Procedures: The Grand Jury Has A Few Complaints Report Date: June 16, 2016 Dear Mayor Tollini, The advance copy of the above report is attached. Please note that Penal Code Section 933.05(f) specifically prohibits any disclosure of the contents of this report by a public agency or its officers or governing body prior to its release to the public, which will occur on June 23, 2016. The Grand Jury requests that you respond in writing to the Findings and Recommendations contained in the report pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05. The Penal Code is specific as to the format of responses. Governing bodies should be aware that the comment or response from the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code section 933 (c) and subject to the notice, agenda, and open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. The Brown Act requires that any action of a public entity governing board occur only at a noticed meeting for which an agenda has been provided. The Penal Code is also specific about the deadline for responses. You are required to submit your response to the Grand Jury within 90 days (September 16, 2016) of the report date: 1 hard copy to: I hard copy to: The Honorable Judge Kelly V. Simmons Marin County Superior Court P.O. Box 4988 San Rafael, CA 94913-4988 John Mann, Foreperson Marin County Grand Jury 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room #275 San Rafael, CA 94903 Responses are public records. The clerk of the public agency affected must maintain a copy of your response. Should you have any questions or technical difficulties, please contact me at grandjury@marincounty.org or at the above address. Telephone inquiries can be made to Patti Church (Aide to the Grand Jury) at (415) 473-6132. Sincerely, John Mann, Foreperson 2015-2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT Report Title: Report Date: Agenda Date: Response by: Title: FINDINGS • I (we) agree with the findings numbered: • I (we) disagree partially with the findings numbered: • I (we) disagree wholly with the findings numbered: (Attach a statement specifying any portions of the findings that are disputed; include an explanation of the reasons therefor.) RECOMMENDATIONS • Recommendations numbered have been implemented. (Attach a summary describing the implemented actions.) • Recommendations numbered but will be implemented in the future. (Attach a timeframe for the implementation.) • Recommendations numbered have not yet been implemented, require further analysis. (Attach an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.) • Recommendations numbered will not be implemented because they are not warranted or are not reasonable. (Attach an explanation.) Date: Signed: Number of pages attached e RESPONSES TO GRAND JURY REPORTS SUMMARY OF PENAL CODE 933.05 Penal Code 933.05(F) states the grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two (2) working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. Penal Code 933.05 also provides for only two (2) acceptable responses with which agencies and/or departments (respondents) may respond with respect to the findings of a Grand Jury report: 1. The respondent agrees with the finding. 2. The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the findings, in which case the respondent shall specific the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. Penal Code 933.05 provides for only four (4) acceptable responses with which agencies and/or departments (respondents) may respond with in respect to the recommendations of the Grand Jury. 1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. 2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be in the future with a timeframe for implementation. 3. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis, with a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency/department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six (6) months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury Report. 4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with a detailed explanation therefore. However, if a finding and/or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency/department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency/department. Penal Code 933 states that the governing body of the public agency shall respond to the presiding judge within 90 days, and that an elected county officer or agency head shall respond to the presiding judge within 60 days. California Penal Code Sections Penal Code 933 No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy scnt to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. Penal Code 933.05 (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to cone before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. (e) During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. (f) A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two (2) working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. 2015/2016 MARIN COU/YTY CIVIL GRA/1P JURY Law Enforcement Citizen Complaint Procedures The Grand Jury Has A Few Con?plaint5 Report Pate: June 16, 2016 Public Release Pate: June 23, 2016 COUNTY OF MARIN 00 • • • 2015-2016 Marin County C'i vi 1 Grand Jury Law Enforcement Citizen Complaint Procedures The Grand Jury Has -s Feil' Complaint: SUMMARY Marin County's Civil Grand Jury undertook an investigation into the Citizen' Complaint procedures that are currently used by Marin's law enforcement agencies. The Grand Jury focused on procedure accessibility, comprehensiveness and clarity. Questioning authority and its representatives can be intimidating and is made more so by opaque and inaccessible policies and procedures. The Grand Jury learned that lodging a complaint with any of Marin County's ten law enforcement entities can be confusing, time consuming and discouraging. The California statute (CPC §832.5) that was enacted over forty years ago requires that Citizen Complaint procedures be established by law enforcement agencies. The Grand Jury discovered that Marin County's law enforcement agencies interpret and apply this statute in various and inconsistent ways. To maintain full public trust, an effective law enforcement complaint process depends on fair and transparent procedures. Through its investigation, the Grand Jury learned that the courts, law enforcement organizations, civil rights advocates and educational institutions all concur that open communication between law enforcement agencies and citizens is essential. An improved and uniform complaint process would provide greater credibility and effectiveness to the Citizen Complaint process. While demonstrating law enforcement's commitment to protect and respect the community it serves, a clear and consistent set of procedures would build a better foundation for interactions between law enforcement and the public. The Grand Jury recommends that every law enforcement agency in Marin County have a clear and complete description on its website and in its lobby, in both English and Spanish, of the department's policy, procedures and forms for filing a citizen complaint. Law enforcement personnel should be trained in and be able to fully describe the process and forms to any inquiring person and direct that person to the appropriate location of the information. Preserving confidentiality and anonymity when requested should be an option (via website and in person) for all complainants. The term "Citizen Complaint" has been questioned insofar as the term implies that non -citizens, e.g. undocumented immigrants, non-residents or visitors, cannot avail themselves of statutory protections against law enforcement misconduct. See for example, 2012-2013 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report: "Law Enforcement Public Complaint Procedures." It has been suggested that the term "Public Complaint" is more appropriate; however, "Citizen Complaint" has taken on a more common use and meaning in this context and that term will be used throughout this Report. Citizen Complaints BACKGROUND Marin County's Police and Sheriff Departments ensure the safety and security of their citizens and the dedication of these law enforcement agencies and the devotion of their officers cannot be overstated. Yet, there are times when questions arise regarding interactions between law and enforcement and the public. While police misconduct in Marin may be infrequent, policies procedures are necessary and legally required for citizens to be able to raise concerns regarding peace officer conduct. When law enforcement and citizens interact, they are not in positions of equality. Because of a peace officer's authority, there is a power differential from the moment he or she comes into contact with citizens. While this power difference may be necessary for officers to do their jobs, a citizen should have a way to complain about those instances where, whether intentionally or unintentionally, a peace officer is viewed or is thought to overstep their authority, role, or behaves inappropriately. Incidents between a peace officer and the public may not rise to the level of illegal conduct, but l or situations involving hostility, rudeness, intimidation, unfairness, threats and unnecessary physical force reduce the effectiveness and reputation of law enforcement. A fair and consistent complaint process holds peace officers accountable to legal, ethical and community standards and expectations. According to David J. Brent, "... the search for a system that will at once be responsive to both the public's need for accountability and the responsibility of the police to regulate themselves is basic to the efficient functioning of the police department as a necessary component within society. In the same journal article, Brent's analyses of interactions between law enforcement personnel reveal that: "...citizens feel that the police do not interact with them in a manner that is responsive to the realities of their daily lives, while the police are unwilling to open the process by which their actions are ultimately examined and regulated to the scrutiny and participation of the citizen."3 2 David 1. Brent, Redress of Alleged Police Misconduct: A New Approach to Citizen Complaints and Police Disciplinary Procedures, 11 University of San Francisco Law Review 587 (1977) 3 Ibid. June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 2 of 15 METHODOLOGY The Grand Jury used the following sources of information for its report: California Law C'ilizen Comphrinis The Grand Jury reviewed statutes pertaining to the Citizen Complaint process under California law. It also reviewed the legislative history of the enactment of those laws. Literature Review The Grand Jury performed extensive research into investigations conducted by other California grand juries, as well as other organizations and groups on the topic of Citizen Complaints. The Grand Jury also reviewed the operations of the San Francisco Office of Citizen Complaints. Law Enforcement Websites The Grand Jury conducted a review and analysis of the websites of all ten Marin County law enforcement agencies. Policies and Procedures The Grand Jury reviewed all Marin County law enforcement agency policy and procedure manuals.a All law enforcement agencies in Marin are required by law to have policies and procedures. Although access is available to citizens, policy and procedures manuals are not generally easy for citizens to find. Police and Sheriff Department Site Visits Members of the Grand Jury undertook, as private citizens, multiple in-person visits to each Marin County law enforcement agency to seek out and obtain information regarding that agency's Citizen Complaint procedures. The following law enforcement agencies were visited: • Belvedere Police Department • Novato Police Department • Central Marin Police Authority • Ross Police Department • Fairfax Police Department m San Rafael Police Department • Marin County Sheriff's Department ia Sausalito Police Department • Mill Valley Police Department ® Tiburon Police Department Police Chief and Sheriff Interviews The Grand Jury interviewed each of the Marin County Police Chiefs5 as well as the County Sheriff. During these interviews, no information was requested or obtained regarding the identity of any peace officer who was the subject of a Citizen Complaint.6 4 Many law enforcement agencies utilize some version of the standard for policies and procedures prepared by Lexipol Law Enforcement that provides customizable, state -specific law enforcement policy content and integrated colicy training The Acting Chief of the Novato Police Department was interviewed. June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 3 of 15 Citizen Complaints DISCUSSION Legal Requirements regarding Citizen Complaints: California Penal Code §832.5 The California legislature addressed the Citizen Complaint process whein 197 , it the enacted tate to California Penal Code §832.5. This statute requires all law enforcementagencies develop procedures for dealing with Citizen Complaints about the conduct of peace officers. Each department or agency in this state that employs peace officers against the shall establish peof procedure to investigate complaints by members f public these departments or agencies, and shall make a written description of the procedure available to the public. encies. The legislature did not provide detailed procedures for law enforcementbehavior The peace officersinnt of legislation was to provide the public with a mechanism by which the could be reviewed, evaluated and, when appropriate, corrected. This is to ensure that officers, while acting under the authority of law, do not engage in conduct that would violate the individual rights of the citizenry. Website Reviews The Grand Jury reviewed each law enforcement agency's website to determine what enforc tiontit contained on the topic of Citizen's Complaints. The statutory mandate that each lawagency make available to the public a written description of the pie explanationdu e it employs the procedure straightforward. This mandate can theilwebsite. be iTo satisfied by of the Citizen Complaint clear, simple and easily located on the information, an explanation of the complaint procedure should be rovided to the law law enforcement agency's website. There should be no need tophysically enforcement offices to obtain information on the process or any necessary ry tThe how site should provide for online initiation of a Citizen Complaint, a completedescription complaint will be investigated and a final determination of its disposition. The Grand Jury reviewed each website for the following: ■ Ease in finding the topic of Citizen Complaints ■ Availability of the written complaint procedure ■ Availability of the Complaint Form is Versions of both documents in English and Spanish languages ■ Ability to file the Complaint Form electronically ■ A description of the disposition process ■ A description of the appeal process ■ A statistical record of past complaints 6 On February 19, 2016, California State Senator Mark Leno for open public inspection of a peace officer's personnel files findings, discipline or corrective action taken pursuant to the Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 4 of 15 introduced SB 1286 amending Section 832,5 to provide relating to the full investigation of a Citizen Complaint, Public Records Act. June 16, 2016 (Wizen Co1/1/)%amts Although all Marin County law enforcement agencies have a website available to the public, there is wide variance among law enforcement agencies in ease of use, availability of forms, multilingual versions; etc. Some websites are difficult to navigate resulting in time-consuming frustration. Such websites are not always intuitive or the information is buried and difficult to find. Some websites have no information at all about Citizen Complaint procedures. The Fairfax Police Department's website, for example, has a general description of the Citizen Complaint procedure, however, the actual complaint form must be obtained by a personal visit to the police station. San Rafael initially had no information on the website regarding a complaint process or how to file a complaint. (Since the Grand Jury's inquiry, the San Rafael Police Department has amended its website.) Some law enforcement websites do have a Citizen Complaint form available, but a full and simple explanation of the complaint investigation process may not be in the same location. On -Site Visits Grand Jury members visited all Marin County law enforcement agencies as private citizens to find out how to file a complaint. It became clear during those visits that CPC §832.5 is interpreted by Marin law enforcement agencies in many different ways. There was wide variance not only among law enforcement agencies, but also as to how different Grand Jury members were received by the same law enforcement agencies on different days. In some cases, staff had to search a file cabinet to find written procedures or forms. Other agencies had a description of the complaint process and complaint forms in both English and Spanish displayed and available in their lobby. A few law enforcement agencies did not know whether or not the information was available on their agency's website. Some law enforcement personnel (officers and staff) were quite knowledgeable and professional regarding Citizen Complaint procedures. In other instances, members of law enforcement were unaware of the details of their own agency's Citizen Complaint process and in some cases inaccurate information was provided. The Grand Jury believes that statutes such as California Penal Code §823.5 requiring adherence to Citizen Complaint procedures were enacted to reduce those instances where fear and intimidation may result in the underreporting of legitimate criticisms of law enforcement personnel. For example, in addition to the complexity of the filing procedures, it can be intimidating and a distinct disincentive when a potential complainant is asked by law enforcement officers or staff (actual questions encountered by Grand Jurors during site visits): ■ "What's the officer's name?" * "Do you want to speak to the officer's supervisor?" ■ "Only the chief handles complaints." • "Are you a resident of this community? Only residents can file complaints." n "Do you want to leave your name and number and someone will get back to you?" ■ "What is your name and address?" • "What's the nature of your complaint?" June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 5 of 15 Citizen Complaints od Such responses to inquiries as noted above on the part of law enforcement might b however, undrshoe a as an effort to resolve a problem before a complaint is brought. They could also, discouraging effect on a member of the public who seeks to know what his or her rights are and what to expect if they bring a complaint. Questions o f confidence in the complainch as those above can lt in t process and underreporting of complaints. Fear of reprisal, lack difficulty finding out how to complain can also contribute to underreporting. Interviews with. Police Chiefs Durg p in in- erson interviews with each police chief, acting chief and the County Sheriff, the Grand Jury members inquired about each law enforcement agency's complaint procedures andabout ow that information was shared with the public. The Chiefs were asked the following: ■ Are policies, procedures and complaint forms in multilingual versions available on their agency's website? Is the complaint information available in the police department's lobby (or elsewhere accessible to the public) without the individual having to request it? • Does a Citizen Complaint have to be made in person? • Does a complainant have to identify himself, place of residence or citizen By non- citizens? ■ Can the complaint be made anonymously? By minors? By thirdp ■ What are complainants advised regarding making false claims? ■ When and how do you inform the complainant of the resolution of the complaint? is Do you keep records of complaints and their resolution? If so, where? How long are they retained? ■ Are records of Citizen Complaints available to the public? The Grand Juryfound that there was considerable inconsistency between the chiefs' and Sheriff's understanding of how their own agency deals with the public and what the Grand Jury members actually experienced upon visiting each agency. During interviews, it became evident that chiefs and the Sheriff were often unaware of how Citizen Complaint inquiries wee alt with y the officers and staff in their respective law enforcement agencies. Significantdiscrepancies policy and actual practice were commonly found during the Grand Jury's research. Policies and Procedures The Grand Jury reviewed each law enforcement agency's policies and procedures manual anthe d found that all ten have information pertaining to Citizen Complaints. Withexception Sheriff, all Marin County law enforcement agencies utilize some version of the ent xipandontegra ed Policies and Procedures, which provides customized state -specific policy training. June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 6 of 15 Citizen Complaints Filing a Complaint All Marin County law enforcement agencies comply with California Penal Code §832.5 in that they have a written Citizen Complaint policy. There is, however, inconsistency in the way in which the procedures are presented to the public. While a law enforcement agency may acknowledge its legal responsibility to have a prompt and unbiased procedure for filing and investigating Citizen Complaints, there is not always a clear explanation of how those procedures actually work. Requiring the potential complainant to, journey through a maze of law enforcement officials and management staff may be a deterrent to an individual pursuing a legitimate complaint. Some examples of inconsistent and confusing policy and procedure instructions are: - The Mill Valley Police Department describes its investigation this way: "The Department member taking your complaint or inquiry will put you in contact with the on -duty Watch Supervisor as soon as possible. If, after talking with the Watch Supervisor, you still feel you have a valid complaint and some action should be taken by the Department, the Watch Supervisor will notify the Division Commander who will then direct an investigation into your complaint and advise findings to the Chief of Police." The Mill Valley Police Department's policy also indicates: "If you feel your inquiry is not handled satisfactorily by the Watch Commander, you are encouraged to talk to the Division Commander." The Sausalito Police Department explains that "Generally, your complaint will be investigated by a command level officer, assigned by the Police Chief' or "assigned to a special investigator". The Tiburon Police department indicates that the Officer's supervisor or a special investigator will investigate the complaint. The San Rafael Police Department states that a "Citizen Complaint will be reviewed by the Chief of Police. It will then be assigned to an investigator." The Marin County Sheriff's Department states that "Minor complaints may be referred to the officer's supervisor, however, major complaints will be referred to the on -duty watch commander or bureau commander." The Central Marin Police Department states its policy as follows: "Officer complaints require that you sign a statement acknowledging that it is a crime to make a false complaint against an officer. If the inquiry appears to be based on a misunderstanding or a lack of knowledge of acceptable or desired conduct, procedure or practices, the department member taking your complaint may offer an explanation, or he/she will put you in immediate contact with the On -duty Watch Commander. After an explanation is offered, and you believe the Police Authority should still take some action, you will be referred to the supervisor of that unit or employee. If the supervisor is off duty, you will be referred to the On -Duty Watch Commander, who will assist you with your complaint. The supervisor will forward your complaint to his/her Division Commander who will review the complaint and forward it to the Chief of Police for his review and direction to ensure a thorough and objective investigation is done." June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 7 of 15 Citizen Complaints These complaint procedures appear to the Grand Jury to create a number of serious hurdles for a citizen to overcome. In some cases, repeated law enforcement interactions and recounting of the same complaint seem to be required before an investigation is undertaken. Climbing a ladder of authority, such as described above before an investigation is initiated, can be a discouraging process making it less likely that a resident will pursue the filing of a complaint. When information is relayed from one level of authority to another, the effect could be the same as the "telephone game" in which the final account of the complaint could be diluted or altered with each successive description. This process is more complicated when foreign language difficulties, concerns regarding citizenship status and apprehensiveness in dealing with law enforcement are present. Communication Between the Public and Law Enforcement Communication between law enforcement and the public regarding Citizen Complaint procedures is an essential step in the effectiveness of any Citizen Complaint program. The unfortunate reality is that many individuals in the community are apprehensive about interacting with law enforcement. News reports, electronic media, casual discussions and past experiences may create founded or unfounded suspicion of the police or Sheriff This may be the case when the member of the public is an undocumented immigrant or does not use English as his or her primary language. Fear of miscommunication, being misunderstood, or being reported to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) can inhibit a person from complaining about the conduct of law enforcement even if their rights have been compromised. While most citizens understand and believe that law enforcement is dedicated to protecting and serving the community, there is, in some instances, an inescapable public uneasiness with law enforcement and this is as real as life. The Grand Jury concludes that a written description of the complaint procedure should, at minimum, contain the following elements: ■ Where the complaint form can be found • How the complaint will be investigated • How the final determination. of the complaint will be disseminated • What appeal process, if any, exists if the complainant is not satisfied with the determination During their interviews, every Chief and the Sheriff stressed that law enforcement wants to keep lines of communication open with the public and the Grand Jury supports that objective. Therefore, a citizen's request for information about Citizen Complaints should be responded to by providing the necessary forms and descriptions of the procedures in a clear, informed and respectful way without any defensiveness or attempt to deflect, intimidate or otherwise discourage the potential filing of a Citizen Complaint. California Penal Code §148.6 and the Complaint Form California Penal Code §148.6 previously stated that potential complainants acknowledge that they could be criminally prosecuted for bringing a false complaint against a peace officer. CPC § 148.6, June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 8 of 15 Citizen Complain s however, was determined to be unconstitutional when the United States Supreme Court declined to overturn a United States Court of Appeal (9th Circuit) ruling to that effect. Unfortunately, the Grand Jury found that such warnings remain in some complaint forms and policy information concerning Citizen Complaints used by Marin County law enforcement agencies. The requirement that a person who brings a Citizen Complaint against a peace officer must acknowledge and sign the information advisory is no longer valid. There should be no language in the complaint form or anywhere else that implies potential penalties for making false claims. Advisories that threaten prosecution or other penalties can be a deterrent to filing a Citizen Complaint. During the legislative session in which discussions for and against the passage of AB 1732 (Section 148.6) were held, the argument in opposition to its passage made this clear: "...this legislation will have a chilling impact on the filing of police misconduct complaints by members of the public. Many persons are now afraid to speak up and are intimidated from filing legitimate complaints of police abuse, by among other things, threats by the officer to sue the victim for libel. If this bill becomes law, the first thing that will happen to victims of police abuse when they go to a police station to file a citizen complaint is an admonishment that they can be jailed if their allegations are not true. We should encourage the filing of police abuse reports, not impose additional roadblocks to chill the process.i7 As of this writing, the Citizen Complaint form provided by the Central Marin Police Authority still includes the language of Section 148.6 and carries its warning even further by asking the citizen to read, understand, and sign off on California Civil Code §47.5. This language alerts the citizen that filing a Citizen Complaint may have civil as well as criminal consequences. To access the Citizen Complaint procedure from the Sausalito Police Department website, one is first directed to a screen containing the entire boldface information advisory from Section 148.6, including the threat of prosecution. The Citizen Complaint form itself contains an admonishment, albeit without the sentence threatening prosecution. The Mill Valley Police Department's Citizen Complaint form, for instance, requires that the complainant sign a verification of the complaint's contents. Sworn statements are not required to initiate the Citizen Complaint process. Requiring an oath may discourage honest people who may be reticent regarding how their complaint will be handled by the system as it potentially raises a fear that the citizen could be prosecuted for bringing the complaint, particularly in cases in which a complaint is not sustained. The Grand Jury concludes that requiring a complainant to sign their name in acknowledgement that they "read and understand" any Penal Code language in connection with their Citizen Complaint may, in itself, create fear about entering into the entire complaint process. Assem, Corn. on Public Safety, analysis of Assem. Bill No. 1732 (1995-1996 Reg. Sess.) June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 9 of 15 Citizen Complaints Anonymity Anonymity is not the same as being unwilling to participate in the investigation. One can be interviewed and participate in the investigation without revealing his or her name, address, or other identifying information. Requiring a complainant to produce or state his or her identification and sign their name to a complaint farm in order to file a Citizen Complaint can be intimidating. This requirement could raise the fear that the complainant's identity and residence may be targeted for retaliation because a complaint is brought against a specific peace officer. A complainant may believe that their name and address could subject them to other kinds of law enforcement contact, such as nuisance traffic stops, other ticketing activities or even reluctance on the part of peace officers to respond to a complainant's calls for assistance. An even greater fear for an undocumented complainant might be a concern about their immigration status, which might outweigh their willingness to file a complaint. Those for whom English is not their first language may also be reluctant to file a complaint since their difficulty in communicating the facts may exacerbate their fear and reluctance to report. In one instance, upon visiting a police station, a Grand Jury member found that Citizen Complaint information was not provided to him because he was not a resident of that law enforcement agency's jurisdiction. Asking a person where they live can be intimidating, may imply that residency is required in order to file a complaint and might be perceived as a loss of anonymity. Another law enforcement agency'required that the person asking about the Citizen Complaint process sign into the police log or meet personally with an officer. To counter these roadblocks to filing a Citizen Complaint, the Grand Jury believes that a citizen should be able to file a Citizen Complaint anonymously, thus helping to reduce any possible reticence in following through. Some Marin County law enforcement agencies acknowledge that they welcome anonymous complaints. They state, however, that such complaints would be very difficult to investigate and make law enforcement's response to the complainant impossible. Personal identification, verifications and signatures thwart anonymity. The Grand Jury concludes that there is no justifiable reason to require the signature, name and address of the complainant on the Citizen Complaint form. These forms should clearly indicate that the name, address, telephone number and signature of the complainant are "OPTIONAL". Citizens who may be reluctant to complain of a violation of their rights should be able to avail themselves of the Citizen Complaint procedure to focus attention on alleged improper law enforcement conduct. This objective also holds true for third parties who observe police misconduct yet do not want to become embroiled in a process to address another person's rights. Law enforcement's interaction with minors is somewhat more problematic. While many law enforcement agencies in Marin County indicate that they will accept and investigate complaints from minors, some require that the minor's parent or guardian sign the complaint form or appear in person with the minor to file the complaint. June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 10 of 15 Citizen Complaints The Investigation, Disposition and Appeal Process The Grand Jury reviewed the policy and procedure manuals for every Marin County law enforcement agency regarding the Citizen Complaint investigation, disposition and appeal process. Investigation Most law enforcement agencies state in their policy and procedures that the complaint will be assigned to an investigator, but no description is provided as to how an investigation will be conducted. Will the investigator speak to the complainant? Will the investigator interview any witnesses or discuss the matter with the officer involved? If it comes down to a "he said, she said" scenario, will the complainant ever be believed over the officer? Further review of the policy and procedure manuals indicates that the investigation into a Citizen Complaint should be completed within one year. If that is not possible, the assigned investigator or supervisor must ensure that the delay is warranted and communicate that to the complainant. Finally, the complainant should be provided with written notification of the disposition within 30 days after a determination has been made. An explanation to the public of what an investigator will investigate, the time frame involved and other potentially complicating issues should be provided to the complainant. Disposition There are four potential classifications: ■ Unfounded: the investigation finds that the alleged act did not occur or involve law enforcement agency officers and/or staff ■ Exonerated: the investigation finds that the alleged act did occur, but was justified, lawful and/or proper ■ Not sustained: the investigation finds there is insufficient evidence to sustain the complaint or fully exonerate the member ■ Sustained: the investigation discloses sufficient evidence that the act occurred and that it constituted misconduct Once again, the Grand jury found information for the public regarding the disposition of a Citizen Complaint to be lacking in both content and consistency among the various law enforcement agencies. Appeals The Grand Jury also concluded that Citizen Complaint procedures should provide some mechanism for the citizen to appeal the results of an investigation. As noted above, a citizen must be notified in writing within 30 days of the disposition of his/her complaint. An appeal process as part of a law enforcement agency's Citizen Complaint procedure could be helpful in short - June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 11 of 15 Citizen Complaints circuiting the need for further legal action. Consequently, the Grand Jury concludes that Citizen Complaint procedures should include some mechanism for the citizen to appeal the result of the investigation if the citizen disagrees with the disposition. Ideally, the appeal should include a review by a body outside of the law enforcement agency. For example, the Novato Police Department allows a complainant to appeal the results to the City Manager. The City Manager, after reviewing the complaint, may forward the complaint to the Police Advisory and Review Board for further review or investigation.8 Training, Compliance and Awareness As noted above, all Marin County law enforcement agencies comply with the requirements of California Penal Code Section 832.5, yet there is inconsistency in how policies and procedures are presented to the public. As a result of the Grand Jury's site visits, website reviews, interviews with police chiefs and Sheriff and reviews of the policy and procedure manuals, it became clear to the Grand Jury that an important component missing in the Citizen Complaint process was consistent training of all law enforcement officers and other personnel. The lack of uniformity in training may explain the inconsistencies. This difference in knowledge of the process may account for some inconsistencies in communicating the policies and procedures to the public. The Grand Jury believes that law enforcement personnel, staff and volunteers should receive regular training on the Citizen Complaint process. Personnel should know how to quickly locate and access written complaint procedure instructions and be able to provide a citizen with whatever forms are needed at the time of inquiry._In addition, all personnel should be welcoming and open to accepting complaints. Law enforcement agency employees should also be familiar with where such materials are located on the law enforcement agency website. Clear and accessible communication with the public, whether in person, by phone or via website regarding anonymity, investigative procedures, disposition and the appeal process should all be part of law enforcement personnel training programs. Transparency and Reporting Complete transparency regarding the number of complaints and their disposition is also essential to maintaining a climate of trust between law enforcement and the public. Even though the number of complaints received by many Marin County law enforcement agencies tends to be few, they should regularly report to their governing bodies the number of complaints received, the general nature and their disposition. At a minimum, this reporting should be on an annual basis and should also be available online. 8 Novato City Resolution 43-00 June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 12 of 15 (Wizen Canit�inil�l.s CONCLUSION In a report entitled Building Trust Between the Police and the Citizens They Serve,9 The United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services wrote: "It is imperative to not only have procedures in place for fairly and impartially accepting, processing, and investigating complaints concerning allegations of employee misconduct but also to inform all police employees and the public of that process. ... `An accessible, fair, and transparent complaint process is the hallmark of police responsiveness to the community'... It is incumbent on the police department to make its citizens aware that a complaint process exists, how to file a complaint, and how the agency processes and investigates complaints." The Grand Jury believes that the majority of Marin County law enforcement members operate within the rules of their profession, and recognize and respect the rights of citizens. However, the need for a well-defined procedure for addressing those instances when that is not the case has been affirmed by the results of the Grand Jury's investigation into the Citizen Complaint process. Clear communication between Marin County law enforcement agencies and the citizenry regarding the Citizen Complaint process is essential for it to be successful, beneficial to law enforcement and not intimidating to the public. FINDINGS FI . Marin County law enforcement agencies have procedures for Citizen Complaints that could act as deterrents to participation in the complaint process. F2. Some Marin County law enforcement agencies employ procedures and admonitions that have been held to be unconstitutional. F3. Some Marin County law enforcement agencies' complaint procedures require face-to-face contact with law enforcement officers, which may deter citizens from using the Citizen Complaint process. F4. Not all Marin County law enforcement agencies provide written policies, procedures and Citizen Complaint forms in English and Spanish. F5. Not all Marin County law enforcement agencies accept and investigate anonymous Citizen Complaints. F6. Information about and access to the Citizen Complaint procedure is difficult to find on Marin County law enforcement agency websites. F7. Marin County law enforcement agencies do not publish the number, the nature or the disposition of Citizen Complaints. 9 U.S, Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Standards and Guidelines for Internal Affairs (2009) June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 13 of 15 Citizen Complaints RECOMMENDATIONS Rl . Every Marin County law enforcement agency should have a clear and full description of the law enforcement agency's policy and procedures for handling Citizen Complaints on its website that is accessible by a direct link from the law enforcement agency's home page to a clearly identified "Citizen Complaints" folder. R2. All Marin County law enforcement agencies should accept the filing of Citizen Complaints online. R3. A clear and full description of the law enforcement agency's policy and procedures along with forms for filing Citizen Complaints should be available to the public in the lobby of each law enforcement agency. R4. Written policies and procedures, as well as Citizen Complaint forms, should be available to the public in English, Spanish and other languages appropriate to the community. R5. Marin County law enforcement agency personnel should be trained in the agency's Citizen Complaint policy and procedures in order to fully describe them to members of the public. R6. All public -facing law enforcement personnel should present an open and welcoming attitude to any inquiry about the Citizen Complaint process. R7. No policy, procedure or form for handling Citizen Complaints should have any language based in whole or in part on California Penal Code Section 148.6 and/or California Civil Code of Civil Procedure Section 47.5, nor should a complainant be required to acknowledge that they have read and understood such language. R8. A person who initiates a Citizen Complaint should not be required to verify or certify the contents of the complaint form. R9. The identification of the complainant on the Citizen Complaint form should be optional. R10. The signature of the complainant should not be required on the form. R11. Anonymous Citizen Complaints, and complaints initiated by minors, should be accepted and investigated in accordance with the agency's procedures. R12. Members of the public who desire information regarding a law enforcement agency's policy, procedures and Citizen Complaint forms should not be required to discuss their involvement, identity or situation before the materials are provided. R13. All Marin County law enforcement agencies should incorporate within their policies and procedures an appeal process that allows the complainant to appeal the disposition to an entity outside of the law enforcement agency. R14. Marin County law enforcement agencies should publish on their websites and annually update the number, nature and disposition of Citizen Complaints. June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 14 of 15 Citizen Coinpl ai :is REQUEST FOR RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code §933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows: From the following governing bodies: ■ The Cities and Towns of Belvedere, Corte Madera, Fairfax, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Sausalito and Tiburon: Fl — F7 and R1 — R14 The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with California Penal Code §933(c) and subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. From the following individual: ■ The Marin County Sheriff: FI — F7 and RI — R14 The Grand Jury invites the following individuals to respond: • The Police Chiefs of Belvedere, Fairfax, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Rafael, Sausalito, Tiburon and Central Marin Police Authority: F1 — F7 and RI — R14 At the time of publication of this report, all website information was accurate as published. Reports issued by the Civil Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code Section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Civil Grand Jury. The California State Legislature has stated that it intends the provisions of Penal Code Section 929 prohibiting disclosure of witness identities to encourage full candor in testimony in Grand Jury investigations by protecting the privacy and confidentiality of those who participate in any Civil Grand Jury investigation. June 16, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 15 of 15 Marin County Civil Grand Jury 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 275 San Rafael, CA 94903 Tel. 415-473-6132 Date: June 16, 2016 Mayor Erin Tollini Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 DIGEST CONFIDENTIAL a Grand Jury Report: Marin 's Hidden Human Sex Trafficking Challenge: It's Happening In Our Backyard Report Date: June 16, 2016 Dear Mayor Tollini, The advance copy of the above report is attached. Please note that Penal Code Section 933.05(f) specifically prohibits any disclosure of the contents of this report by a public agency or its officers or governing body prior to its release to the public, which will occur on June 23, 2016. The Grand Jury requests that you respond in writing to the Findings and Recommendations contained in the report pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05. The Penal Code is specific as to the format of responses. Governing bodies should be aware that the comment or response from the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code section 933 (c) and subject to the notice, agenda, and open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. The Brown Act requires that any action of a public entity governing board occur only at a noticed meeting for which an agenda has been provided. The Penal Code is also specific about the deadline for responses. You are required to submit your response to the Grand Jury within 90 days (September 16, 2016) of the report date: 1 hard copy to: 1 hard copy to: The Honorable Judge Kelly V. Simmons Marin County Superior Court P.O. Box 4988 San Rafael, CA 94913-4988 John Mann, Foreperson Marin County Grand Jury 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room #275 San Rafael, CA 94903 Responses are public records. The clerk of the public agency affected must maintain a copy of your response. Should you have any questions or technical difficulties, please contact me at grandjury@marincounty.org or at the above address. Telephone inquiries can be made to Patti Church (Aide to the Grand Jury) at (415) 473-6132. Sincerely, John Mann, Foreperson 2015-2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury (2. Report Title: RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT Report Date: Agenda Date: Response by: Title: FINDINGS • I (we) agree with the findings numbered: • I (we) disagree partially with the findings numbered: • I (we) disagree wholly with the findings numbered: (Attach a statement specifying any portions of the findings that are disputed; include an explanation of the reasons therefor.) RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations numbered have been implemented. (Attach a summary describing the implemented actions.) • Recommendations numbered have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. (Attach a timeframe for the implementation.) • Recommendations numbered require further analysis. (Attach an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This tirnefrarne shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.) • Recommendations numbered will not be implemented because they are not warranted or are not reasonable. (Attach an explanation.) Date: Signed: Number of pages attached RESPONSES TO GRAND JURY REPORTS SUMMARY OF PENAL CODE 933.05 Penal Code 933.05(F) states the grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two (2) working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. Penal Code 933.05 also provides for only two (2) acceptable responses with which agencies and/or departments (respondents) may respond with respect to the findings of a Grand Jury report: 1. The respondent agrees with the finding. 2. The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the findings, in which case the respondent shall specific the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. Penal Code 933.05 provides for only four (4) acceptable responses with which agencies and/or departments (respondents) may respond with in respect to the recommendations of the Grand Jury. 1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. 2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be in the future with a timeframe for implementation. 3. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis, with a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency/department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six (6) months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury Report. 4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with a detailed explanation therefore. However, if a finding and/or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency/department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency/department. Penal Code 933 states that the governing body of the public agency shall respond to the presiding judge within 90 days, and that an elected county officer or agency head shall respond to the presiding judge within 60 days. California Penal Code Sections Penal Code 933 No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. Penal Code 933.05 (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. (e) During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. (f) A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two (2) working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. 2015/2016 MARI/1 COU/ITY CIVIL GRA/ID JURY Marin's Midden Human f ex Trafficking Challenge It's Happening In Our backyard Report Date: June 16, 2016 Public Release Date: June 23, 2016 2015-2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Marin's Hidden Human Sex Trafficking Challenge It's Happening In Our Backyard SUMMARY "Reading text messages from their 16 -year-old daughter as she begged for help, the parents.of the young girl could only imagine the nightmare she was living. She was being used as a sex slave and threatened with violence. This wasn't some Third -World nation. It was happening in Marin."I "Armed with a photo of the victim and copies of the text messages provided by the FBI, San Rafael police scoured the Canal Neighborhood, the victim's last known location. Officers eventually found the victim and a female suspect at the San Rafael Transit Center. Police officers anested Samantha Johns, a 19 -year old Vallejo resident, for human trafficking. A second suspect, the male, was not in the area."2 Federal law defines human sex trafficking as "trafficking in v4 ich'a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced -to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age".3 It occurs both internationally'and domestically. The Grand Jury's E-� investigation into human sex trafficking examined its prevalence in Marin, how effectively law enforcement pursues it, what resources are devoted to it, ow victims are helped, and the level of outreach. Based on our investigation, the Gr=and Jury concluded: • • Humcrn sex trafficking is thought 16 be prevalent in Marin, but mostly unrecognized, under -reported, and rarely subject to intervention. Statistics are hard to come by because of the hidden nature of the crime, the lack of resources to pursue cases, the highly labor intensive investigations.required, and the absence of a county -wide database to track it. The Board of Supervisors should fund the creation of a database that systematically tracks victims :using consistent classifications and shared definitions, to properly identify the victim and the crime, as well as document its prevalence. Data should be collected from government agencies, law enforcement agencies, and civic organizatioxs that deal with sex trafficking victims. ® Some law enforcement officers have not been effectively trained in the Marin County Un. florin La"w Enforcement Protocol for Human Trafficking. Law enforcement agencies should ensure that all officers are consistently trained in these protocols. s State law mandates two hours of training on human trafficking and some Marin law enforcement agencies may not be complying with this law, as not all agency heads could Derek Wilson, "Authorities Hit Brakes on Human Trafficking", January 14, 2015, Marinscope Newspapers, http://www.marinscope.eom/news_pointer/news/authorities-hit-brakes--on-human-traff cking/article_fa439662- 9c32-11 e4-a6da-2f35f8589b41.html 2 3 Kamala Harris, Attorney General, "The State of Human Trafficking in California", 2012 Ibid Hannan Sex Trafficking confirm that their officers received this training. All Marin law enforcement agency heads should make sure their officers receive this state mandated training. • An effective consistent training package for law enforcement that incorporates the roles of all County resources/processes in addressing human trafficking does not exist. The Board of Supervisors should provide resources for and convene a local multidisciplinary team to create supplemental training on human trafficking to all law enforcement agencies. This training might also include that mandated by the state, as well as the Marin County Uniform Law Enforcement Protocol for Human • Trafficking to provide a seamless experience. 3 ■ Human trafficking training for medical and fire department EMS profei•sional` s inconsistent - some have been trained, some have not, and some who hays,been trained have not been trained recently. Healthcare providers and EMS professionals: are in a unique position to recognize the signs of human trafficking since 88% of domestic victims have contact with these workers while being trafficked. 4_ -Marin County fire departments should ensure that all EMS personnel are trained in recognizing human trafficking and where victims can find help: t, is Human trafficking training of students, teachers, and parents by Marin school districts is inconsistent, although the Marin County Office of Education has hosted several educational efforts for some educators and the public. This training is particularly important as the average age of solicitation is 12-14 years of ages According to Marin County District Attorney Nicole Panteleo,•half Of the victims with whom she works are from Marin County.6 Students must recognize the signs of a peer being recruited, parents must understand how to monitor their child's activities, and teachers need to report suspicious activities. The Marin C'ounty„School/Law Enforcement Partnership should develop and implement programs to educate students, parents, and teachers to recognize the signs of hiinan trafficking and where to find help. • Public outreach campaigns are `insufficient and do not reach all critical audiences. A number of well-regarded groups are conducting outreach, but budgets are small, resources scarce ai 4 communications fragmented. The Board of Supervisors should provide the.Marini County Coalition to End Human Trafficking with the resources needed to support the organization and expand its community outreach. a Dan Gorenstein, "Healthcare Takes on the Fight Against Trafficking", March 2, 2016, http://www.marketplace.ors 5 Heather Clausen, et al, "Human Trafficking Into and within the United States", 2009 6 Danielle Chemtob, "Marin's Hidden Trafficking Industry", October 20, 2015, http://www.redwoodbark.org June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 2 of 32 BACKGROUND I h afaWl Sex `I ru f ji eking Marin's informal Human Trafficking Task Force received a tip that a juvenile was offering sex through a website for escorts in December 2014. Investigators arranged a sting to meet the minor at a motel and deternlined that she was an 18 year-old runaway who was being trafficked by Shawn Buckley of Novato and his fiance, Jazmin Moniq Khayami of San Anselmo. The couple took the victim's money and gave her only what was necessary to keep her working for sex clients, such as food and clothing. Both have accepted a plea deal, with Shawn Buckley receiving a prison sentence of nine years, four months in March 2016.8 ,b„ f"f This 18 -year-old girl was one of the lucky ones. Many other victims don't escape and are trafficked until they are no longer of value to their traffickers. Identifying these victinis, assisting them in leaving their traffickers and finding on-going help has proved to be a challenge for communities and governments alike. `-.!", Human sex trafficking has become a widespread scourge of our time with,,around 4.5 million victims worldwide.9 Two million are children with 100,000 minors in the�con nercial sex trade in the US alone,'° And California has three of the FBI's 13 highest human sex trafficking areas in the nation: Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego: 1 Because of our proximity to San Francisco, the Maim County`Civil'Grand Jury initiated this investigation about human trafficking in Marin to answer the following questions: • Do we know how pervasive it is? �_.,. T,�yifrqs \ Ng; • Does Marin law enforcement have enoug'h,resqurces and training to effectively pursue traffickers and are they doing s6?•) • Once victims are identified, are they receiving the social services necessary to survive and turn their lives around? )1 e Are we taking steps to educthe public and professionals on how to identify and help victims? Definition of Human.'Traffiekibg-' Under California Penal Cod9236.1 PC, the crime of "human trafficking" in California is defined as: 1. Depriving someone of their personal liberty with the intent to obtain forced Iabor or services froin them, 2. Depriving someone of their personal liberty with the intent to violate California's pimping and pandering laws, California's child pornography laws, California laws against extortion and blackmail, or certain other California laws concerning commercial sexual activity and the sexual exploitation of children, or 7 Gary Klein, "Trial Ordered for Couple in Pimping Case", August 25, 2015, Marin IJ 8 Gary Klein, "Novato Man Sentenced to Prison for Pimping Runaway", March 18, 2016, Marin IJ 9 Kamala Harris, Attorney General, "The State of Human Trafficking in California", 2012 10 Polaris Project, "Human Trafficking Statistics", 2010 11 California Against Slavery. "What is Human Trafficking?", February 25, 2014 June 23, 2016 Marin County. Civil Grand Jury Page 3 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking 3. Persuading or trying to persuade a minor to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to violate one of those same laws.'2 The International Labor Organization estimates that for every one victim of sex trafficking there are nine victims of labor trafficking worldwide. However, sexual exploitation is by far the most commonly identified form of trafficking in persons: • Identified sex trafficking victims: 79% • Identified labor trafficking victims: 18% ■ Identified other trafficking victims: 3%13 100% Thus, this investigation will focus primarily on human sex trafficking. Any individual under the age of 18 induced into commercial sex is automatically a:victim of sex trafficking. For juveniles, the law does not require force, fraud, or coercion. Under CA law, a minor cannot consent to sex with an adult. These children are n,ot,pro.stitutes, but rather, victims of rape.la 4'• Many people believe human trafficking is the smuggling ofiyictirns,from other countries, but according to the 2012 California Attorney General report, .72%tof California's victims are American.15 Human trafficking is about modern day slavery without regard to country of origin. Domestic women and girls — even girls from Marin f`are=trafficked and coerced into the sex industry.16 Not all sex workers are trafficking victims, in the sense that they have been explicitly coerced into prostitution. However, a huge percentage of prostituted women and girls are subject to constant physical and psychological abuse. Scope of the Human Sex Trafficking Problem Human sex trafficking is widespread in America — victims are sold in all 50 states. Yet there is limited public awareness of its scope. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, human trafficking JS "the fastest growing criminal enterprise in the world, making it second only to drugtraf icking.17 Yet, it is difficult to estimate the total number of victims in the US due to the:lidden nature and control the exploiter has over the victims. Experts indicated in 2010 tliat.there wer at least 100,000 child victims of sex trafficking in the US, while upwards of 325;000xemairi at"risk.18 Adding in adult victims makes this number even greater. Prostitution is so profitable that urban gangs are switching from drug trafficking to sex trafficking. Drugs can be sold only once, while a sex trafficking victim can be "used" over and 12 California Penal Code 236.1 PC: See Appendix for full description 13 International Labour Office, "ILO Global Estimate of Forced Labor: Results and Methodologies, 2012 14 California Penal Code 236.1 PC: See Appendix for full description 15 Kamala Harris, "The State of Human Trafficking in California", 2012 16 Grand Jury interviews with Marin County law enforcement agencies 17 http://www.socialworkers.ore,/diversity/affirmative action/humanTraffic1206.PDF 18 Kotrla, K., "Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking in The United States", 2010 June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 4 of 32 Human Sex Trufjcking over again. Trafficking sex victims can be Less risky than selling drugs. When caught with drugs, there is an obvious commitment of a crime. When caught with a victim, the secrecy and psychological abuse of the victim can make conviction of the pimp far less probable. A pimp can make $150,000-200,000 per child each year and exploits an average of 4-6 girls per ycar.19 And according to the 2014 Urban Institute study on the commercial sex economy in eight US cities, pimps in one city studied earned an average of$32,822 per week.20 Who are the victims? • Sex trafficking victims come from rural, urban, and suburban communities throughout the -US: They have diverse socioeconomic backgrounds and varied Ievels of education. Victims can even come from stable, two-parent upper income homes. She can even be the girl next dobr. With access to the Internet, where recruitment is rampant, a naive child can easily become'seduced by the slick, enticing trafficker's postings. The average age of solicitation is 12-14 years of age and the vast majority (70-90%) were sexually abused prior to being trafficked:21-,,, Despite the fact that all children can be targets, among the mosevulnerable•victims are: "�: � < III Victims of abuse and neglect22 �� � �..�' ■ Homeless youth23 ` • Undocumented migrants24• v • Children from impoverished and broken homcs25 '4`,,,b ■ Runaways26 ■ Drug users27 • Lack of stability in home28 ■ Mentally -challenged individuals29. According to one study, 30% of shelter minors and 70% of street minors are victims of commercial sexual exploitation.3° . - 1 Lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgender, questioning (LBGTQ) children are particularly vulnerable to becoming sex trafficking victims.- According to the Family and Youth Services Bureau within the Administration of Children and Families at US Health and Human Services, LGBTQ youth 19 NPR, "Trafficked Teen Girls Describe Life in the Game", 2010 20 Meredith Dank,et al, "Estimating the Size and Structure of the Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight Major US Cities", Marchi, 2014. 21 Heather Clausen, et al, "Human Trafficking Into and within the United States", 2009 2z Kamala Harris, "The State of Human Trafficking in California", 2012 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid. 2' Heather J. Clawson, Ph.D. and Nicole Dutch, B.A., "Identifying Victims of Human Trafficking", January 20, 2008, part of study for US. Department of Health & Human Services 26 National Hurnan Trafficking Resource Center, https://traffickingresourcecenter.orslwhat-human- trafficking/human-trafficking/victims 27 H.E.A.T. Watch, Alameda District Attorney's Office, http://www.heatwatch.orsJhuman trafficking 78 Ibid. 29 Ibid. 30 Estes and Weiner, "Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the US, Canada, and Mexico", 2001, University of Pennsylvania. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 5 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking account for up to 40 percent of the runaway and homeless youth population.31 Once living on the street, the vulnerability to sex trafficking increases significantly and the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children reports that most runaways in the US will be approached by sex traffickers within 48 hours.32 Methods of Recruitment Carl Orlando Washington was arrested for pimping a San Rafael girl at a San Jose gambling event, reported police on May 29, 2016. The suspect met the girl at a bus stop in Richmond and showed romantic interest in her. According to the Marin IJ, "Then he began cultivating leer as -a prostitute, buying her provocative clothing, furnishing her with drugs, and taking her to watch_.: other prostitutes at work, said San Rafael police Sgt. Scott Eberle."33 , ' r Washington then "took her to the San Jose gambling event to sell sex to mer there telling her g what services to offer and how much to charge. When she failed to earn enou - -mo .-telling man had the girl beaten, Eberle said."34 �_� Y� Romancing potential victims is just one way pimps recruit their quay. Traffickers often identify and play on their victims' vulnerabilities; thus creating a dependent relationship between victim and trafficker. They utilize a i umber;of ways to recruit their victims. Traffickers may: G: ■ Pretend to romance victims, then force ox manipulate them into prostitution ("Romeo pimps) y. ■ Kidnap and beat them into submission until they agree to have sex with strangers. These "Gorilla pimps" are the most violent and.:brutal traffickers.36 • Lure victims with false promises of a jbb, such as modeling or dancing.37 • Befriend victims, introducing them to drugs and/or alcohol, then force them into prostitution.38!Y • Send another trafficking victin to recruit others.39 Romeo pimps are by far the;most common. They offer love and support to gain their victim's trust. Many victims dare trafficked out of foster homes. Imagine how easy this must be when a ,r4 31 Lonnie James Bean, "LGBTQ Youth at High Risk of Becoming Human Trafficking Victims", June 26, 2013, htfp://WWWacflhs.aov/bloJ2013/06/1sbtg-vouch-at-high-risk-of-becomin-human-traffickine-victims 32 The N�'. ational Runaway Switchboard 33 Gary Klien, "Suspect Accused of Pimping Underage Girl", May 30, 2016, Marin IJ 34 Ibid. 3' Michelle Lillie, "How Street Traffickers Recruit Young Girls, Human Trafficking Search, March 17, 2014, http://humantraffickin asearch.net/wp/how-street-traffickers-recruit-youns-girls 36 Ibid. 37 Polaris, Sex Trafficking in the U.S.: A Closer Look at U.S. Citizen Victims, May 2015, http://po1arisproi ect. or/resources/sex-traffickins-us-closer-1 ook-us-citizen-victims 38 Michelle Lillie, "How Street Traffickers Recruit Young Girls, Human Trafficking Search, March 17, 2014, http://h umantraffickin g_search.net/vp/how-street-traffickers-recruit-voun E -girls 39 Ibid. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 6 of 32 Human Sex Trekking foster child is unloved by parents, bounced. from foster home to foster home and meets a pimp who shows them the first love and respect they have ever received. How Exploiters Control Their Victims Pimps break their victims down psychologically -and develop control over them through a combination of feigned affection, intense manipulation, withholding addictive substances, cruel violence, and emotional abuse. As a result, victims become trauma -bonded to their traffickers. They become robbed of free choice. These victims may fear leaving for a number of reasons including4°: ■ Emotional attachment to the pimp ■ Fear of physical violence to self and/or children from the pimp ■ Shame 'Fw • Feelings of isolation and low self esteem. ` ).. •-�a • Drug addiction • Psychological trauma as a result of chronic abuse and manipulation. ■ Traffickers often convince victims that they are outside the 1.aw and can never seek protection from the police Victims are treated as property, with some pimps claiming their ownership by branding them with tattoos or symbols of the pimp's name. In fact, one hospital discovered an RFID4I chip embedded in a victim — like she was somebody's pet.• 42 Pimps often move their victims from town to to on a`circuit. This constant movement through •a region helps them control their victims; -.while keeping "fresh inventory" available to "johns".43 Role of the Internet in Sex Trafficking =` The Internet plays a significant role in both the recruitment of victims and "johns". Traffickers use online classifieds, social media, and dating websites to contact both. They also may use postings on social media sites, such as Facebook, to monitor their victims' locations and activities. Pimps advertise the sexual services of victims anonymously and cost effectively on websites such as Backl age.coiii: In fact, 75% of underage sex trafficking victims said they had been advertised or sold online.44 Even "johns" make use of the Internet, employing online forums to review their=experiences and provide information about how to avoid law enforcement detection. 40 Grand jury interviews with law enforcement and social agencies 41 RFID (radio frequency identification) is a technology that incorporates the use of electromagnetic or electrostatic coupling in the radio frequency (RF) portion of the electromagnetic spectrum to uniquely identify an object, animal, or person. 42 Dan Gorestein, "Healthcare Takes on the Fight Against Trafficking", http://www.marketplace.org/2016/03/02/health-care/health-care-takes-fight against -trafficking 43 Grand Jury interviews with law enforcement. 44 Thorn, Report on the Use of Technology to Recruit, Groom, and Sell domestic Minor Sex Trafficking Victims", 2015. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 7 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking Helping the Victim Escape The nature of human sex trafficking presents significant obstacles to those who seek to protect and assist the victims. As law enforcement receives more training on human sex trafficking and recognizes that they are victims rather than criminals, many agencies have stopped arresting them. Instead, law enforcement seeks to identify them, help them, and refer them to social services, as well as arrest their exploiters. However, often these victims don't cooperate. They may: • Be experiencing an emotional attachment to a captor formed as a result of continuous stress, dependence, and a need to cooperate for survival. • Be afraid and intimidated by the traffickers • Be unaware of their rights and might not consider themselves victims e' ■ Have language barriers ■ Fear deportation • Distrust outsiders, particularly law enforcement • Be isolated due to repeated moves from location to location and kept away from others - repeatedly moved to different locations NItz Thus, the job of helping victims and gaining testimony against the trafficker is very difficult. Police especially need to be aware of the link between human; sex trafficking and domestic •violence. A call to a domestic violence situation may be represented as a fight between intimates, when, in fact a pimp is beating his victim. Treating the Victim , {. Once victims have escaped their exploiters, victiin;s often require comprehensive services, starting with immediate safety, health and shelterrieeds. Physical medical needs may include treatment for injuries from beatings, STDs, ors.ibstance abuse. Victims' mental health needs may include specialized counseling.;_and reco�ery services. Additional help can include legal services, witness protection, interpreters, education, and life skills training. Finding shelter for minor victims is more complex than for adults. Since many jurisdictions no longer arrest minors for prostitution, emergency shelter may not be available during police detention and minors are released, having no place to go except to their exploiters. For longer- term victim shelters foster homes are deemed far more effective than most group homes. In group homes, gixls arse at risk of being recruited back into prostitution by other girls in the facility,4 Ieally, fosteparents should be certified in dealing with a traumatized child and some experts believe only one child should reside in a foster home if that child is a victim.45 Victim advocates and Health and Human Services professionals say foster homes should be culturally competent — African-Americans should be placed with African-Americans, Native Americans with Native Americans, where possible. LBGTQ children need specially tailored services.46 Importantly, human sex trafficking victims, both minors and adults, are often severely traumatized and require both immediate and long-term intensive trauma -informed treatment. These services are often in short supply, especially bi-lingual ones. 45 Interviews with victim advocates and Marin Health & Human Services. 46 Interviews with victim advocates and Marin Health & Human Services. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 8 of 32 111.111 1(111 Sex 7rafflckinz METHODOLOGY The Cirand Jury interviewed representatives from the following entities: ■ Alameda District Attorney's office • Belvedere Police Department • Center for Domestic Peace • Central Marin Police Authority • Community Violence Solutions • Fairfax Police Department • FBI • Marin County Children & Family Services ■ Marin County Coalition to End Human Trafficking • Marin County District Attorney's office • Marin County Probation Department • Marin County Public Defender's office e Marin County Sheriff's Office • Mill Valley Police Department • Novato Police Department • Oakland Vice Squad Unit • Ross Police Department • San Anselmo Police Department • San Rafael Police Department p • Sausalito Police Department, ■ Tiburon Police Department ■ West.Marin Advocacy, The Grand Jury conducted a survey with the following Marin fire departments: • • Bolinas Fire Department. . • Corte Madera Fire_Department • CSA #31 (Marin County Fire Department) • Kentfield Fire Department • Larkspur Fire Department ■ Marinwood Fire Department • Mill Valley Fire Department ■ /Novato Fire •. D partment ■ • Ross Valley Fire Department Et-. San. Rafael Fire Department • Southern Marin Fire Department ■ Tiburon Fire Department The Grand Jury attended the following presentations on Human Trafficking: • First 5 Marin Children & Families Commission workshop on "Youth Safety: Human Trafficking in Marin", November 9, 2015 • Marin Child Abuse Prevention Council Presentation by Shared Hope International, January 21, 2016 . The Grand Jury conducted online research and reviewed documents listed in the Bibliography. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 9 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking DISCUSSION The Prevalence of Human Sex Trafficking in Marin DeAnna Schlau from Community Violence Solutions, a nonprofit organization that helps victims of trafficking is reported to have stated that "Marin has had an attitude for a long time that it doesn't really happen here and we're just getting on board with the fact that it really does happen here."47 Human sex trafficking is hidden, but thriving in Marin because it is:48 • Next door to San Francisco, one of the nation's top hubs for human sex traff eking;, making it an easy stop on the "circuit" of victims transported around the Bay area. `and region. ; << s Home to many wealthy "johns" able to pay with cash, thus enabling -traffickers to charge more. • Geographically desirable to traffickers since it is near a major_highway (101). Some Marin gangs have incorporated sex trafficking in their criminal though, according to Marin law enforcement, not to the same degree,aS in'San Francisco and the East Bay where gang involvement in sex trafficking is rampant: ' • 1J J Traffickers move their victims on a circuit around the Bay Area and the region. Pimps, including those from Oakland, Vallejo, Sacramento, and San.Francisco, bring victims to Marin because of demand. According to the Marin IJ, "Around the; ba: there's a quiet group of captives — mostly 12- to 17 -year old girls — who are living'arevolviing-door existence. They're swapped to a handful of Bay Area brothels every few weeks as' -the victims of human trafficking, Marin officials say."49 "These girls stay about two weeks`in every brothel, and then they're changed to a different city", said Rosie Alvarez, deputy probation' officer. 5o Comprehensive statistics on human trafficking in Marin are hard to come by, just as they are nationally. First, the hidden nature of the crime makes it difficult to pursue cases. Second, the crime itselfis under -reported because Marin has no comprehensive database for humantrafficking. Common categories and shared definitions do not exist. Potential cases of human traffiekini are often investigated and prosecuted under related offenses such as pimping, pandering; -and -prostitution, rather than trafficking, as specified under the California Penal Code §236.1.... ). 47 Danielle Chemtob, "Marin's Hidden Trafficking Industry", October 20, 2015, http://redwoodbark.orc/2015/04/isolation-fear-manipulation-marins-hidden-human-trafficking-industry/ 48 Grand Jury interviews with law enforcement 49 Stephanie Weldy, "San Rafael Forum Highlights Wide Devastation of Human Trafficking, Marin IJ, November 11, 2015. 50 Stephanie Weldy, "San Rafael Forum Highlights Wide Devastation of Human Trafficking, Marin IJ, November 11, 2015. '1 Kamala Harris, "The State of Human Trafficking in California", 2012 June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 10 of 32 111n11an Se.v Mgt licking San Francisco has a robust system for collecting human trafficking data.52 Not only have they created a common definition for all organizations to use, but they compile data from 19 organizations that deal with human trafficking: law enforcement agencies, other government agencies (e.g. Health & I-Iuman Services), and victim advocate and other community-based organizations. The Board of Supervisors should consider providing resources to the Marin County Coalition to End Human Trafficking to collect and analyze this data. Another option might be using the newly approved health clinic data hub to compile this information once it's launched.5 Pimps, "johns", and locations should be included. Lastly, Marin County lacks the resources needed to pursue more cases. Investigations into, human trafficking cases are labor intensive as they involve highly detailed forensics around social media, the Internet, and cell phones. Thousands of messages and postings must be reviewed and code words deciphered. This hard evidence is particularly important as many potential victim witnesses fail to testify because they fear for their livesTM� ; Unlike San Francisco and Alameda County, Marin does not have a formal law enforcement human trafficking task force and has limited resources devoted .to huiiiadtrafcking. Without the means to fully pursue traffickers and conduct forensics, the number; of prosecution cases is low. Despite the lack of firm statistics, two major Marin o'untranti `trafficking efforts address the scope of the problem: `Y ■ The Marin County Uniform Law Enforcement Protocol for Human Trafficking: On April 9, 2015, the Marin District Attdrney's office released protocols to ensure that Marin County law enforcement agencies consistently identify the unique dynamics of human trafficking to serve victims and effectively respond to and investigate cases based on the best recommended practices. Police chiefs of all Marin cities and towns approved the protocols ■ Marin County Coalition to End Human Trafficking: A partnership was formed in 2014 by various agencies, nonprofits, civic groups, county government and law enforcement with a goal to educate the community and stop human trafficking in Marin County. This coalition is co-chaired by the Marin District Attorney and a victim advocate from CommunityYiolence Solutions.55 The Grand.Juy lauds the Marin District Attorney's Office for both creating the protocols and its major role in'creating the coalition. Officers working on sex trafficking cases report that the protocols seem to be complete and that the DA's office is very responsive. 52 Mayor's Task Force On Anti -Human Trafficking, "Human Trafficking Report in San Francisco in 2015", August 2015. 53 Richard Halstead, "Marin Supervisors Authorize Funds for Health Clinic Data Hub", May 29, 2016, Marin IJ 54The Marin County Uniform Law Enforcement Protocol for Human Trafficking, April 9, 2015 55 Grand Jury interviews June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 11 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking Who Are the Victims in Marin? Marin law enforcement notes that sex trafficking victims in Marin represent all socioeconomic groups; include domestic and international victims; are comprised of Marin residents and non- residents; and include minor victims. Wide socioeconomic spectrum: According to the Marin IJ, deputy probation officer Rosie Alvarez said, "We've seen cases in Novato and in affluent communities in San Rafael — it's across the board."S6 Children in higher income bracket families are vulnerable as they often:,:,, spend more time alone and generally live in households with fewer family members. Asdaf��resul, ,,,, access to unmonitored computer use often increases, bringing with it the risk of unsafe ,,, communications.$ ffi Domestic and international victims: Sex trafficking victims range from refugees smuggled into the country to US or local girls from highly educated two parent families.. -According to the Marin IJ, "Refugees often from Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, and Guaternala{are seeking more opportunity in the country are also often preyed upon," said Toro Wilson; Executive Director of Canal Alliance. Marin residents and non-residents: According to (former) Marin`County Deputy District Attorney Chuck Cacciatore, "Generally we are seeing Marin residents who are human trafficking victims, but we also see victims from out of the area. ''.imps have sex workers on a circuit."58 Marin County Deputy District Attorney Nicole'Pantaleo: points out about half of the victims with whom she works are from Marin County.59 Minor and adult victims: According to a eport from Community Violence Solutions, a victim advocate nonprofit, approximately one third of the victims it aided in Marin between March 2015 and March 2016 were under the age of 1.8.6° An article in The Redwood Bark pointed out that in 2014 West Marin Advocacy , another victim advocate nonprofit, worked with 30 survivors of sex or labor trafficking... Again, one third were under the age of 18 and some were high school students from Tam High and Novato: 6 l Where Are The Victims in Marin? According to Cou ty_la'v enforcement interviewed, human sex trafficking is most often found in San Rafael, Novato andMarin City. It takes place in almost all, if not all Marin hotels, including some of the b e rspected chains. Hotels and motels are the most common venues since they 56 StephhaanNWeldy, "San Rafael Forum Highlights Wide Devastation of Human Trafficking, Marin IJ, November 11, 2015. 57 Emily Dominique Sims, "Law Enforcement and Social Service Responses To Human Trafficking in Marin County, October 17, 2014, Sonoma State University 58 Derek Wilson, "Authorities Hit Brakes on Human Trafficking", January 14, 2015, Marinscope Newspapers, http://www.marinscope.com/news_pointer/news/authorities-hit-brakes-on-human-trafficking/article_fa439662- 9c32-11e4-a6da-2f3 5f8589b41.html 59 Danielle Chemtob, "Marin's Hidden Trafficking Industry", October 20, 2015, www.redwoodbark.ore 60 Report to Soroptimist International of Marin from Community Violence Solutions outlining results of Soroptimist's grant of $25,000 to aid victims of human trafficking. 61 Danielle Chemtob, "Marin's Hidden Trafficking Industry", October 20, 2015, www.redwoodbark.org June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 12 of 32 Human Sex ' ruffickirtg provide confidentiality for the "john". "Johns" can enter and exit these buildings without it being obvious they are there seeking sex. Sex trafficking victims can also be found in Marin massage parlors. Within San Rafael's Canal district, human sex trafficking is common, and few residents of San Rafael are aware of it. The Canal has a large population of migratory and often seasonal workers who have cash on hand. The availability of cash, paired with a large male population, has lured traffickers to set up apartments in the Canal where young girls are trafficked.62 One law enforcement official told the Grand Jury that prostitutes in the hotels make $200 per encounter and the ones in the Canal arca make $40-$60. He said both types make the same .ti. amount of money in a night — it's just that the Canal prostitutes must work harder. Q How Marin Law Enforcement Finds and Prosecutes Traffickers Unlike some large metropolitan areas, Marin does not have a law enforcement task force focusing full-time on human trafficking. Instead, an informal p ,art -tire I Inman Trafficking Task Force has coalesced, consisting of a Street Crimes Unit officer fret -1i San Rafael, two County Sheriff's deputies, and a probation officer. Members of this ad hoc task force, passionate about human trafficking, conduct investigations as a "collateral" assignine it to regular duty and sometimes volunteer their time while off duty. When regular patrols happen upon a potential human trafficking case, they refer the case to the task force for investigation. 0 Marin's Human Trafficking Task Force often works with. other law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI, and multiple county police departments iii conducting stings. "Operation Cross Country", an on-going series of stings led. by the FBI and Marin's task force, is frequently conducted in our county in concert with Centra1Marin and Novato police departments, as well as the Sheriff's Office and Probation Department: The goal of these stings is to help victims escape their captors and arrest traffickers and."johns",63 Several Marin agencies ai•e`also members of a regional task force, which consists of the FBI, Homeland Security, the California Department of Justice, as well as sheriff's offices, district attorneys, probation departments, and police departments of over 25 jurisdictions within the Bay Area.G4 Collaboration among these agencies is critical due to the nature of the circulation of human sex trafficking victims around the region. The task force meets once a month to share information. ..• Investigating and prosecuting cases can be difficult. According to Marin County Deputy District Attorney Chuck Caccatiatore, "We find people who are victims and don't even realize it. I once investigated what was reported as a domestic violence case, but was really sex trafficking."G5 6') Sierra Marie Tomsky, "Human Trafficking and Sexual Slavery: A Local Epidemic", May 2014, Dominican University of California http://scholar.dominican.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1017&context=senior-theses 63 Grand Jury interviews with law enforcement. 64 San Rafael Police Department, Marin Sheriff's Office, Novato Police Department, Marin District Attorney's Office, Marin Probation, 65 Derek Wilson, "Authorities Hit Brakes on Human Trafficking", January 14, 2015, Marinscope Newspapers, http://www.marinscope.com/newsj,ointer/news/authorities-hit-brakes-on-human-trafficking/article fa439662- 9c32-1 1 e4-a6da-2f35f8589b41.html June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 13 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking "Almost 100 percent of the time, they are always going to say that they are independent, they're not victims, they're doing this out of their own free will," Eberle said. "These girls have been brainwashed."6 He also told the Redwood Bark, "Another major challenge in prosecuting trafficking cases is getting victims to testify against traffickers. Once you even get past that hump of convincing the victim that we are there to help them out, it's scary to testify in court, to give a statement, to know that you are `snitching' on someone who has a gun."67 Hence, there's a need for dedicated resources to conduct time intensive investigations to prove exploitation with or without the victim's cooperation. Law enforcement must review thousands of messages on cell phones, in social media, and other modes of communication. Bank statements must be analyzed and code words must be deciphered. Though the Grand Jury lauds the work of Marin's informal Human Trafficking askPaTee, the task force currently does not have adequate means to pursue more than just a few cases. It's a chicken and egg dilemma...the number of documented cases is not high due to-1`ack of a dedicated resources; but, support for providing more resources is not shared by all Marin law enforcement because of the lower numbers of cases.68 { • Although quantifiable results are not available for established task forces in other jurisdictions, the Grand Jury believes one solution to documenting more cases and -increasing prosecutions would be the creation of a dedicated full-time human trafficking task force. This would enable law enforcement to conduct the time intensive forensies.neeessary to get more convictions; document the extent of the problem in Marin; and,provide:ihe focus that is currently lacking to a very important problem — both publicly and among Marin' law enforcement. A task force might also enable Marin to gain government grants for combating human trafficking. Such a task force might be partially financed from asset forfeitures of real estate, automobiles, cash, and jewelry, just a5 Marin's Major Crimes Task Force is currently supported. However, there is widespread disagreerrient about the need for this task force in Marin. The Grand Jury interviewed` over 35 key law enforcement officers, victim advocates, DAs, and other key players in combatinghuinari trafficking. About half agreed Marin should devote specialized resources to this crime arid half disagreed. Those who believed=; a dedicated human trafficking task force should not be created cited a number of reasorfs All Marin law enforcement agencies would need to form a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA} -f'o provide the funds or manpower needed for the task force. A JPA can be difficult to maintain as resources for agencies, especially small town police forces, can be scarce. In fact, the Marin County Major Crimes Task Force, created as a JPA in 1977, has experienced periodic withdrawals and additions of various towns and cities in the partnership. A number of Marin's towns believe human trafficking is not a problem for their jurisdictions and, hence, may not choose to devote resources to the crime. They 66 Danielle Chemtob, "Marin's Hidden Trafficking Industry", October 20, 20]5, www.redwoodbark.ora 67 Ibid 68 Grand Jury interviews with law enforcement agencies and district attorneys June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 14 of 32 Littman Sex ii•af:icking believe it's a problem for San Rafael and Novato to solve. Creating and maintaining a JPA may prove challenging. 2. Should such a JPA be feasible, some pointed out that this would reduce manpower devoted to other tasks and crimes, such as patrolling for burglaries and they could not support this trade-off. 3. Some will not support a task force unless they can see clear documentation of cases. As mentioned previously, this is not possible without dedicated resources. 4. A few felt that there was no need for local anti-human trafficking efforts as the crime is transient. They believe a regional approach to be more prudent as victims are constantly being cycled through various Bay Area locales, including Marin. i The Grand Jury considered recommending the creation of a dedicated human trafficking task force and believes the number of documented cases would increase dramatically should such a team be forrned. Other counties in the Bay Area, such as Alameda and :San Francisco, have had such success with their task forces. However, we are not recommending this step at this time as citizen awareness is low and, hence, the political will to fund a..task force is low. •As Marin citizen awareness of the prevalence and horro vof huinan trafficking increases and more precise data is captured, Marin should consider c eating a formal dedicated full-time or part-time human trafficking task force. In conclusion, human sex trafficking maybe mo't_.pretvalent in San Rafael, Novato and Marin City, but "johns" come from all parts of Marin.69p exists everywhere. Marin should come together to see human sex trafficking as a problem for the entire county to solve. Training Law Enforcement in Human Trafficking In November 2012, voters passed Proposition 35, that requires a minimum of two hours of training in handling complaints of human trafficking for every law enforcement officer assigned to field or investigative duties. This training is often delivered via a two-hour Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) video. Training among Marin agencies at this time seems inconsistent and possibly not conforming with the Iaw as not all law enforcement agency heads could confirm This trainI g of their officers and/or which officers had received it. InApril 2015 the -Marin District Attorney released the Marin County Uniform Law Enforcement Protocol for Iluman Trafficking, which was signed by each Marin police chief. All law enforcneit should be trained in using these protocols. The Grand Jury interviewed representatives from all Marin County law enforcement agencies, including every police chief and the County Sheriff, and found that their officers have not been consistently trained in these protocols. 69 Grand Jury interviews with law enforcement. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 15 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking According to the protocols76, the goals of the training are to inform officers of: • Human trafficking laws • Marin County trafficking protocols ■ The department's human trafficking policy and procedures ■ The signs and dynamics of human trafficking and its effects on victims • Therapeutically appropriate investigative techniques • District Attorney policies • Victim advocacy organizations working in their jurisdictions and resources available • Policy and procedures of other state and federal organizations collaborating with; the department • Human trafficking issues specific to various cultures and lifestyles Ca • • Civil and immigration remedies and community resources ■ Protection of victims Unfortunately, our interviews revealed that some officers still believe that human sex trafficking victims are criminals and act accordingly. Additionally, many of ourresporidents pointed out that awareness of the victimhood and dynamics of human sex trafficking amollg law enforcement is similar to that of domestic violence situations thirty years ago, .when it was not taken seriously nor prosecuted vigorously, and victim blaming was rampanA Most of our law enforcement and victim advocate respondents who work frequently with Marin sex trafficking cases feel that more training is rieeded_aniong the rank and file. Some Marin law enforcement officers not working with human trafficking -cases feel the current state of training is adequate.71 The Grand Jury recommends a multidisciplinary.: oup to train law enforcement. This group might consist of Child and Family Services, a)DA, victim's advocate, law enforcement human trafficking specialists, etc. This approach enables the group to better understand each other's roles and facilitate a seamless approackto trafficking. How Marin Aids Its Victims Before the county started recognizing that "prostitutes" were very often "victims" of trafficking, almost all sex trafficking victims were arrested for prostitution. Today, Marin officers do not arrest individu they perceive to be trafficking victims. After stings occur in Marin, young victims gree detain . and offered a number of resources to help them get their lives back on track, including,sheltet `and counseling. However, they often choose to go back to their life with their exploit out of fear for their lives. According to Marin law enforcement and victim advocates, it takes a number of contacts with the trafficking victim to move her (it is usually, but not always a she) on to recovery. Once the victim makes that move, she likely needs therapy immediately (and in the long-term) because most are found to be severely traumatized. Ideally, everyone in relevant social service agencies and law enforcement should be trained in a trauma -informed approach to deal with victims. In Marin some have received this training and others have not. 70 Marin County Uniform Law Enforcement Protocol for Human Trafficking, April 2015 77 Grand Jury interviews with all police chiefs and some officers, the County Sheriff's office, and victim advocates. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 16 of 32 Human Sex 7rgfficking In addition, Marin County and victim advocate groups do not fund enough therapists to meet victim needs. And few, if any, are bilingual. And, at the "Youth Safety/Human Trafficking in Marin" workshop, November 2015, Laurel Freeman from the Center for Domestic Peace, pointed out that these victims often receive the services of the least experienced therapists — interns. Marin County's Children & Family Services (CFS) take charge of minor victims, providing emergency care for all victims and long-term care for Marin residents. Foster homes are the shelter of choice, but unfortunately, Marin has a severe shortage of foster care and victims are often placed outside of Marin. This shortage will only grow worse as an administrative bill. California AB 403: "Foster Youth: Continuum of Care Reform", is proposing the elimination of many long-term group hones, shifting more children to foster homes. Counties will be charged with recruiting a large number of foster homes quickly and some fear the quality of homes recruited may decline to meet their goals. Compounding the shortage of foster homes for sex trafficking victims is the fact that many foster parents fear serving this population.' Marin County's CFS received a grant from the state and recently;,developed.,coinprehensive interagency protocols for helping Commercially Sexually Exploited. Children (CSEC), providing a seamless multi -disciplinary approach helping to eliminate duplication -and fragmentation of services. These protocols were completed in February 2016 and CFS is currently in the process of implementing them. Several nonprofits aid adult victims in Marin, including: • Community Violence Solutions (CVS): a crisis intervention agency, providing victims of sexual or labor exploitation suppoxt, referral, and services in Contra Costa and Marin. Marin law enforcement, the FBI and social agencies often work with CVS, referring ;, • r` victims to the organization.74 p , ■ West Marin Advocacy:.Serves Sail Geronimo Valley, Nicasio and Coastal Marin, providing assistance to sexual trafficking victims. Programs include court accompaniment; referrals to "social service and legal service organizations, and expert training to nonprofit, governmental, and law enforcement.75 ■ Center for Domestic Peace: provides holistic services to sex trafficking victims, including shelter, life skills, counseling, safety planning, legal services and more.76 • 72 https://leainfo.leeislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill id=201520160AB403 73 Grand jury interviews 74 http://www.cvsolutions.org 75 http:l/westmarinadvocacy.org 76 http://www.centerfordomesticpeace.org June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 17 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking Outreach to Victims and the Public Two populations must be reached via communications campaigns: ■ Victims of human sex trafficking, who need information on how to get help. • The public, which needs to understand the problem and be educated in how to identity trafficking and whom they should contact. A number of organizations are conducting or have conducted outreach to both victims and:the public, including: ,= • Center for Domestic Peace e t \ • Community Violence Solutions f<� ,�:: is League of Women Voters ■ Marin Organizing Committee • Shared Hope International • Soroptomist International of Marin F -:,k, • West Marin Advocacy ` w' �1 iPi Communication media typically include presentations t9 groups, billboards, posters, leaflets, websites, and bus advertising, depending on who is beirigtargeted -Co receive the information. Some of the aforementioned groups pay particular attehtioritQ:1 igh-risk areas such as Canal Street because of the trafficking activity there. Spa�nishianguage communications are critical in this area. - , 'k' ---:,'`c;," 1~� Despite the number of enthusiastic and weii-regarded�groups conducting outreach, their budgets are small and resources are too scarce to create the awareness and education needed, particularly in educating the public. Additionally;=with seven or more organizations trying to get the word out, communications can be fragmented and possibly contradictory. yti ljf The Grand Jury believes customized; education campaigns on recognizing the signs of trafficking and reporting it should be provided to a number of different groups, including, but not limited to: • Students who need i'9.recognize trafficking when it happens to a friend and understand how anyonecanpe recruited and endangered in social media. ■ Parents and teachers who can monitor and help youth. ■ `Healthcare professionals who have special access to patients. ■ -- EMT:arid-other emergency services who have access to environments closed to law -, enforcement. • 'Hospitality industry staff at lodgings who are exposed to trafficking as much of this crime takes place at hotels and motels in Marin. • Golden Gate transit and Marin Transit staff, especially bus drivers, who come in contact with victims. Education is particularly important for students, parents, and teachers. With the average age of recruitment being 12-14 (middle school age), a student who has received education can perhaps keep a friend from falling for a false pitch from a Romeo pimp, a parent can monitor their child's social media activities, and teachers can report suspicious activities. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 18 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking The Marin County Office of Education (MCOE) has hosted a number of educational efforts for various school officials and the public, sponsored by community partners such as the Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the FBI, Voces de Marin, the Center for Domestic Peace, the Marin Organizing Committee, the Marin Child Abuse Prevention Council and more. Some efforts at the local middle school and high school levels have been implemented, though there is no evidence of a consistent systemic county -wide program to ensure education of students, teachers, and parents. The most effective way to provide this school training might be through the Marin County.- School/Law Enforcement Partnership, a collaboration of schools, law enforcement and community agencies. Their goal is to encourage and support a countywide effort to keep Marin schools and communities as safe and healthy environments for all students and, families. ' ' Outreach to these audiences is critical and free resources are available online :For example, the National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC) has a number of.tools for.training and public outreach campaigns. According to this group, when a public outreach campaign is launched, NHTRC hotline sees a 30-60% increase in calls.77` , .-,v Neighboring Alameda County has produced a number of campaigns and the Grand Jury recommends that the Marin County Coalition to End Human Trafficking use them where possible. In fact, the Alameda DA's office held Oakland' focus groups with victims to learn to speak their language and craft the most effective appeals ii then/campaigns. G lr The Role of The Marin County Coalition to End Huinan Trafficking 4:; t' ; The Marin County Coalition to End H airman Trafficking (The Coalition) is a partnership of numerous social agencies, county governrn nt, civic groups, nonprofits and law enforcement agencies, with the goal of ending hurrian trafficking via education, outreach, and advocacy. This coalition resides under the auspices of the Marin County DA office, co-chaired by the Marin District Attorney and a victim advocate from Community Violence Solutions. The Coalition was formed in 2014 to create a forum and to harness the resources of numerous. agencies to achieve the group's goals. The coalition is not meant to replace the activities of its members, but to provide a platform for synergies around each organization's work. Outreach is one of the major functions of the organization and its objective is to reach the following audiences:M1 t • Potential and actual victims to warn them and tell them how to get help. ® . Potential and actual victim's family and friends to alert them on how to recognize the sigps of trafficking and what to do. ■ General public to increase awareness of the crime and its victims. The Grand Jury applauds the DA office and others who founded this coalition. The group meets approximately every three months and most participants are essentially volunteers, having full-time jobs — so most of the work is performed outside their normal jobs. There is no dedicated staff. Little funding is provided, although recently The Coalition received 77 http://www.traffiickinsresourecenter.org June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 19 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking $5,000 from the Board of Supervisors Community Fund (-M.001% of County budget) to create a website. While many coalition members believe the organization is making strong progress, some members feel the group is moving too slowly, is too fragmented, is too unwieldy, and committees aren't communicating well. Although the Grand Jury believes that The Coalition is moving as quickly as it can, it believes that much better progress can be made with dedicated resources, such as a full or part-time position handling outreach and coordination. The Coalition might be able to qualify for a grant for a dedicated position, as did the South Bay Coalitio _;to, End Human Trafficking.78 ;`. Additionally, our Marin coalition might consider filing for nonprofit status so.that they can conduct fundraising to strengthen their resources.- \`a Training for Healthcare Professionals and EMS First Responders R'• According to a 2014 Loyola University Chicago School of Law, Report;. 88.:%:of domestic human trafficking victims reported having contact with a healthcare professiona;:while being trafficked, and these professionals are often the only ones to interact withtlem while in captivity.79 These interactions were especially common for survivors who caught STD's, became pregnant while in their trafficking situation, or were hospitalized after physical -and sexual assault. In 2012, the California Attorney General's comprehensive: &ort, "The State of Human Trafficking in California", recommended that Firstitesppriders and healthcare professionals be trained in identifying victims, determining thefi• medical and mental health needs, and providing access to available resources.80 r,•• A number of hospitals and health systems around the country have launched training programs for their staff. Some states, including Florida and Michigan, require healthcare workers to receive some type of human traff cking,training as part of their regular licensing process.8] But according to Dr. Jeff Barrows; director of US training at the anti -trafficking group Hope for Justice, "...most healthcare providers know little to nothing about trafficking and receive no training on how to identify and he1p� victims. The vast majority is absolutely clueless. Only a handful is looking -at it seriously."8 / l.- • -3 All health sysiterns, large and small, need the tools and education to help thwart trafficking. Though the' Grand Jury has no authority to make recommendations to non-governmental Marin Couiity health systems, it encourages all healthcare venues in Marin to train staff on recognizing the sign's, of human trafficking and connecting victims with available services. There are a 78 Grand Jury interviews 79 Laura J Lederer and Christopher A. Wetzel, "The Health Consequences of Sex Trafficking and Their Implications for Identifying Victims in Healthcare Facilities", 2014, http:/lwww.l uc-edu/law/centers/healthlaw/annals/arch ive/volume232014 80 Kamala Harris, "The State of Human Trafficking in California", 2012 81 Maureen McKinney, "Hospitals Train Staff to Spot Victims of Human Trafficking, Modern Healthcare, June 20, 2015 82 lbid June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 20 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking number of free online courses tailored specifically for healthcare professionals, especially ER workers, available from various universities and the National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC).83 Correspondingly, firefighters and EMS professionals are in a unique position to encounter, identify, and report victims of human trafficking. In emergencies, first responders may be given access to victims and locations inaccessible to law enforcement. It is critical that these professionals be trained to recognize and report human trafficking. Training these first responders in scanning the emergency environment for signs of human trafficking and haw. to report it could result in more victim rescues and trafficker apprehensions. Training and tools ate. available for free online.84 r t. Although some Marin fire departments have had training in human trafficking, nianyhavenot, and some who have been trained, have not been trained recently. Several departments use Blue Campaign training provided by the Department of Homeland Security. Also Learned: Labor Trafficking is Happening in Marin Marin Law enforcement has focused on sex trafficking because itis the More commonly identifiable form of human trafficking. However, the Grand;Jury found that many law enforcement officers and victim advocates believe labortiafficking is taking place in Marin as well. Representatives from two victim advocate organizations interviewed said that they had received reports of labor trafficking for nursing homes ;r'anching, and farming, with one citing a victim rescued from forced labor as a nanny. Both organizations have come to the aid of labor trafficking victims. However, there are no'iecent.arre.as for labor trafficking, likely due to: ■ The far more under -investigated and under -reported nature of labor trafficking (versus sex trafficking), ■ The higher visibility of sex trafficking, ■ A lack of law enforcement resources to pursue it. CONCLUSION Despite the fact that the BatXrea is one of the largest human trafficking markets in the US, many Marin County citizens have little or no awareness that it exists in our community. Though trafficking victims hear the brunt of the human costs of being trafficked, the community must bear in if lr ense;social costs, such as truancy, homelessness, the rising need for medical and mental health servics, a$expanding law enforcement efforts. •-may_ It is tithe for Marin to wake up and recognize the prevalence of human trafficking in our communities. The Grand Jury urges the County and its cities and towns to devote more resources to combating this scourge, rescuing its victims, and helping these victims return to society. 83 National Human Trafficking Resources Center: https://traffickingresourcecenter.org/material-type/online- train ings 84 www.dhs.gov/blue-campaign/awareness-training June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 21 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking FINDINGS F1. Human sex trafficking is mostly unrecognized, under -reported, and rarely subject to intervention in Marin. F2. A significant number of human sex trafficking victims are from Marin, not just transients imported from other areas. F3. Reports from two Marin County victim advocate organizations show that approximately 30% of the victims they aid are under the age of 18. ? ( •'` F4. Some Marin County law enforcement officers still believe some human :traffickingvictiins are criminals. F5. State law mandates that officers receive two hours of training on human trafficking and some Marin agencies may not be complying with this law. F6. Training of Marin County law enforcement on the Marin Canty Uniform Law Enforcement Protocol for Human Trafficking has been inconsistent "across agencies. Vii" , F7. Law enforcement officers and others who are closest to human trafficking believe the California mandated two-hour POST training video on human trafficking is not sufficient. F8. Marin law enforcement agencies rarely-use`multidisciplinary training, incorporating collaboration between Children Farrily Services(CFS), the District Attorney, law enforcement experts, and possibly victims. F9. Training for firefighters and EMS professionals in recognizing human trafficking victims and reporting the crime is inconsistent in Marin. F10. It is difficult to determine the extent of human trafficking in Marin because of inconsistent classification arid,defi iitions of the crime, as well as the lack of a central clearinghouse for this data. F11. The Marin County school districts do not provide education on a systematic basis for students; parents'and teachers in recognizing signs of human trafficking. F12._ Humantraffickmg outreach has been fragmented and is currently insufficient in reaching ,critical audiences. F13. The Marin County Coalition to End Human Trafficking Coalition needs dedicated resources to make it more effective. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 22 of 32 RECOM MVMENDATIONS Human Sex Trafficking R I . All law enforcement officers should be consistently trained in the Marin County Uniform I al4 Enforcement Protocol for Human Traffr.cking. R2. All Marin law enforcement agency heads should ensure their officers receive the California mandated two hour human trafficking training. R3. The Board of Supervisors should convene a local group of human trafficking experts,- (including xperts-(including CFS, law enforcement subject experts, FBI, victim advocates, DA's, and perhaps a victim) to create a multidisciplinary training presentation. This training should include the unique roles of all County personnel, resources, and processes in addressing human trafficking. Additional resources will be needed to support this training as none are devoted to this task now. This training should include information on the trafficking of females and males, as well as LGBTQ. R4. Once this multi -disciplinary training package is completed,.Marin County law enforcement agencies should ensure that all Marin law enforcement officets.be't•ained. R5. Marin County fire departments should ensure that all EMS personnel are trained in recognizing human trafficking and how to report it, and incorliorate this in their annual training. 0 `: y 0 R6. The Board of Supervisors should furphgcreation of'a database that systematically tracks adult and minor victims, using consistent classification and shared definitions to properly identify the victim and the crime;'as well as' document its prevalence. Data should be gathered from any organization dealing`with trafficking victims, including law enforcement agencies, government agencies(e.g. Marin County Health & Human Services), civic organizations, and victim advocate organizations. 11 R7. Marin County Office -sof Education should work with the Marin County School/Law Enforcement Partnership to develop educational programs to ensure that students, parents, and teachers are trained in recognizing the signs of human trafficking and where they can find help. R8. The Board of Supervisors should provide the Marin County Human Trafficking Coalition resources necessary to expand community outreach to schools, faith communities and the public-. The Coalition should explore a grant for a dedicated position that supports coalition logistics and outreach campaigns. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 23 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking REQUEST FOR RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal code section 933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows: From the following governing bodies: • Bolinas Fire Protection District: Fl -F13, R5 • Bolinas-Stinson Union School District: F1 -F13, R7 • Central Marin Police Authority: Fl -F13, R1 -R7 • City of Belvedere: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • City of Larkspur: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • City of Mill Valley: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • City of Novato: Fl -F13, R1 -R7 ■ City of San Rafael: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • City of Sausalito: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • CSA #28 (West Marin Paramedic): F1 -F13, R5 • CSA #31 (County Fire): F1 -F13, R5 IN Dixie School District: F1 -F13, R7 N, • Kentfield Fire Protection District: Fl -F13, R5 • Kentfield School District: F1 -F13, R7 • Lagunitas School District: F1 -F13, R7 In Larkspur -Corte Madera School District: Fl 13; R7 • Marin County Board of Supervisors: F1-F13,`'R= R8 ■ Marin County Office of Education: Fl -F 13; R7 ■ Marinwood Community Service ,District: F 1 -E -P3, R5 • Mill Valley School District: F140,,R7 • Nicasio School District: F1 -F13, R7 4- • ■ Novato Fire Protection District: F1 -F13, R5 is Novato Unified School District: Fl -F13, R7 ■ Reed Union Schoo1 Ditrict: 'F 1'4.13, R7 • Ross School District: Fl -F1:3, R7 ■ Ross Valley Fire Department: F1 -F13, R5 • Ross Va1leySchoolDi'strict: F1 -F13, R7 ■ San Rafae'l'S:chool District: F1 -F13, R7 • Sausali"to Marin City School District: F1 -F13, R7 • Shoreline Unified School District: F1 -F13, R7 _';Soutlern Marin Emergency Medical -Paramedic System: F1 -F13, R5 • '- .Southern Marin Fire Protection District: Fl -F13, R5 • Stinson Beach Fire Protection District: F1 -F13, R5 • Tamalpais Union High School District: F2 -F23, R7 • Tiburon Fire Protection District: F 1-F 13, R5 • Town of Corte Madera: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • Town of Fairfax: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • Town of Ross: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • Town of San Anselmo: F1 -F13, R1 -R7 • Town of Tiburon: Fl -F13, R1 -R7 June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 24 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking The governing bodies indicated above should be aware the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code section 933(c) and subject to the notice, agenda, and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. From the following individuals: • The Marin County Sheriff: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 • The District Attorney: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6, R8 al Marin County Superintendent of Schools: Fl -F13, R7 r•• .1,71 ,k,„ June 23, 2016 A 7 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 25 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking The Grand Jury invites the following individuals to respond: • Police Chief, Belvedere Police Department: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 ■ Police Chief, Central Marin Police: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 is Fire Chief, Corte Madera Fire Department: F1 -F13, R5 • Police Chief, Fairfax Police Department: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 • President, Falcon Critical Care Transport: Fl -F13, R5 ■ President, Falck/verihealth, Inc.: F1 -F13, R5 • Fire Chief, Larkspur Fire Department: F1 -F 13, R5 • President, Marin County Fire Chiefs Association: F1 -F13, R5 • President, Marin County Police Chiefs Association: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 • Fire Chief, Mill Valley Fire Department: F1 -F13, R5 • Police Chief, Mill Valley Police Department: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 • Chief Executive Officer, NORCAL Ambulance: F1 -F13, R5 • Police Chief, Novato Police Department: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 ■ Police Chief, Ross Police Department: FI -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 • Fire Chief, San Rafael Fire Department: F1 -F13, R5 • Police Chief, San Rafael Police Department: F1 -F13, R=1 -R4, R6 -R7 • Police Chief, Sausalito Police Department: F1 -F13, R1 -R4, R6 -R7 ■ President, St. Joseph's Ambulance Service: F1 -F13, R5 • Police Chief, Tiburon Police Department: F1 -F13 't1 -R4, R6 -R7 r June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 26 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking; BIBLIOGRAPHY Government Documents Marin County DA, "Marin County Uniform Law Enforcement Protocol for Human Trafficking", April 9, 2015. Kamala Ilarris, "The State of I-Iuman Trafficking in California", 2012 Child Welfare Council CSEC Action Team, "Improving California's Multi -System Response to. Commercially Sexually Exploited Children: Resources for Counties", multiple documents 2013- 2016. �3 ' AB403 (Stone): Foster Youth: Continuum of Care Reform bill, February 16, 2016. South Carolina Human Trafficking Task Force, "South Carolina State Plan to Address Human Trafficking" June 12, 2014. L. ,; tip..y California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Trainin <(POST) "Post Guidelines on Law Enforcement Response to Human Trafficking, 2014. t..45; Miami -Dade County Grand Jury, "Enslavement of Our Children:. Identifying and Combating 1-lunman Sex Trafficking in Our Community", Kill 2012:;_1,.. Orange County Grand Jury, "Sex Trafficking of girls", 2012. Press Release, Office of the District Attorney, Marin County, CA, "Marin County Human Trafficking Task Force", July 28, 2014. Mayor's Task Force On Anti -Hinman Trafficking, "Human Trafficking Report in San Francisco in 2015", August 2015.;: Articles Dan Gorenstein, "Healthcare Takes on the Fight Against Trafficking", March 2, 2016, www.marketplace.org Nicholas Kristof, "Every Parent's Nightmare", March 10, 2016, The New York Times. PriscillaAlvarez, "When Sex Trafficking Goes Unnoticed in America", February 23, 2016, The Atlantic magazine. Noah Berlatsky, "Child Sex Workers' Biggest Threat: The Police, January 20, 2016, The New Republic magazine. Youthlaw.org, "Counties Across California Explore Multi -Agency Responses to CSEC", July 2015 newsletter. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 27 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking Meredith Dank, et al, "Estimating the Size and Structure of the Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight Major US Cities", March, 2014. Derek Wilson, "Sex Trafficking `Pandemic' Impacts Marin County, Marinscope, September 17, 2014. Danielle Chemtob, "Marin's Hidden Trafficking Industry", October 20, 2015, www.redwoodbark.org Megan Hansen, "Marin Human Trafficking Task Force Aims to Raise Awareness, Train; Law''\ Enforcement", August 2, 2014, Marin IJ. Margaret Ballou, "Marin Voice: Human Trafficking is a Local Problem", April 11., 20:15;.:Marin IJ. a�. Joanne Williams, "Stuck in Traffic: A Look at Human Trafficking in Marin" January 8, 2015, Pacific Sun. fF. Stephanie Powell, "Heroes of Marin: Emily Sims", December 241:2014; Pacific Sun Gary Klein, "Trial Ordered for Couple in Pimping Case f ;:August 25, 2015, Marin IJ. 'As Lisa Fernandez, "Rapper `Mitchy Slick' Arrested onKidnap,Human Trafficking, Porn Charges, NBC Bay Area. Gary Klein, "San Rafael Prostitution Sting Trips 10 Suspected Johns at Hotel", February 4, 2016, Marin IJ.; John Flynn, "Everyday Prostitutes Caught Up in Human -Trafficking Hysteria Around the Super Bowl, February 3, 2016, Pacific rSub } Katy Steinmetz, "Oakland Lauriches Pimp -Shaming Website", July 2, 2014, Time magazine. Goldie Taylor, "The Sex -Trafficking Victim Next Door, January 22, 2016, The Daily Beast. John Meekins " ' umari-'Trafficking Thrives Because Officers Don't Know What It Is", August 5, 2014, In Public Safety, American Military University. PostStaff, "Tillman Trafficking a Rising Concern in Marin County", July 10, 2015, The Post News Group. Gary Klein, "Novato Man Sentenced to Prison for Pimping Runaway", Marin IJ, March 18, 2016. Maureen McKinney, "Hospitals Train Staff to Spot Victims of Human Trafficking, Modern Healthcare, June 20, 2015. Christopher Gray, Barry Phegan, "San Rafael First -Responders Are Going a Step Further", Marin IJ, October 25, 2015 June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 28 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking Michelle Lillie, "How Street Traffickers Recruit Young Girls, Human Trafficking Search, March 17, 2014, http://humantraffickingsearch.net/wp/how-street-traffickers-recruit-young-girls 'Stephanie Weldy, "San Rafael Forum Highlights Wide Devastation of Human Trafficking, Marin IJ, November 11, 2015. Laura J Lederer and Christopher A. Wetzel, "The Health Consequences of Sex Trafficking and Their Implications for Identifying Victims in Healthcare Facilities", 2014, http://www.lue.edu/law/centers/healthlaw/annals/archive/volume232014 Thorn, Report on the Use of Technology to Recruit, Groom, and Sell domestic Minor Sex' Trafficking Victims", Texas Christian University 2015. Hope Gillete, "Disturbing New Report Details Hispanic Role In Sex Traffic", 1-IuffPost Latino Voices, April 6, 2014. r Elizabeth Pathy Salett, LICSW, "Human Trafficking and Modern Day Slavery", Human Rights & International Affairs Practice Update, November 2006, t�• °, htip://socialworkers.org/diversity/affinnative actionlhumanlfaffr4206.pdf Derek Wilson, "Authorities Hit Brakes on Human Trafficking",'January 14, 2015, Marinscope Newspapers, http://w.ww.marinscope.com/newP pointer/hews%authorities-hit-brakes-on-human- trafficking/article fa439662-9c32-11 e4-a6da-2f 35f8589b4'1.htm1 NPR Youth Radio, "Trafficked Teen Girls Describe Life In The Game", December 6, 2006, http://wwvv.npi7.org./2010/1 2/06/10/12/06/131757019/vouth1 •adio-trafficked-teen-girls-describe-life-in-the- game Lonnie Jaynes Bean, "LGBTQ Youth at. High Risk of Becoming Human Trafficking Victims", June 26, 2013, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/blog/2013/06/lgbtq-youth-at-high-risk-of-becoming- human-trafficking-victims Gary Klien, "Suspect Accused of Pimping Underage Girl", May 30, 2016, Marin IJ. Janis Mara, "Gang Activity 'Very Low' in Marin", June 3, 2016, Marin IJ Richard Halstead, "Marin Supervisors Authorize Funds for Health Clinic Data Hub", May 29, 2016, Marin IJ Websites' Center for Domestic Peace: www.centerfordomesticpeace.org Community Violence Solutions: www.cvsolutions.org National Human Trafficking Resource Center: www.traffickingresourcecenter.org Bay Area Anti -Trafficking Coalition (BAATC): www.baatc.org June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 29 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking West Marin Advocacy: http//:westmarinadvocacy.org Soroptimist International: www.soroptimistintemational.org Polaris Project: www.polarisuroiect.org Blue Campaign, Department of Homeland Security and Department of Education: www.dhs. Qov/blue-campaign Shared Hope Intemational: www.sharedhope.org Marin Women's Commission: www.marinwomen.org/human-trafficking-study San Francisco Collaborative Against Human Trafficking: www.sfcahtorg Human Trafficking Search Global Resource & Database: www.humantraffickitiesearch.net California Against Slavery: http://californiaaeainstslavery.org H.E.A.T. Watch, Alameda District Attorney's Office, Www.li'eatwatch.org Marin County Office of Education, School/Law Enforcement Partnership, www.marinschools.org/SafeSchools/Pages/Schod1=Law-Enforcement-Partnership.aspx Studies Urban Institute of Justice, Improve the Investigation 2012 N. ,7!.r x, .4' submitted ktb National Institute of Justice, "Identifying Challenges to and Prosecution of State and Local Human Trafficking Cases" April w Richard J. Estes and Neil Alan Weiler, "The Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children In the U. S., Canada and Mexico.."; University of Pennsylvania, September 19, 2001 Ls College/GraduateThesis Sierra Marie Tomsky, "Human Trafficking and Sexual Slavery: A Local Epidemic", May 2014, Dominican 'University of California. h4p:1%sclioi ai : dominican . edu/cgi/viewcontent. c ai?article=1017&context=seri or -theses Emily Ddirninique Sims, "Law Enforcement and Social Service Responses To Human Trafficking in Marin County, October 17, 2014, Sonoma State University. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 30 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking Appendix A: Penal Code Section 236.1 PC 236.1. (a) Any person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to obtain forced labor or services, is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (b) Any person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 8, 14, or 20 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars :; •f' ($500,000). • (c) Any person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce, or'persti'ade, a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in.a coinniercial'sex act, with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking. A violation of this subdivision is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison as follows: (1) Five, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (2) Fifteen years to life and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) when the offense involves force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, viblence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person. (d) In determining whether a minor was caused, induced,` or persua ed to engage in a commercial sex act, the totality of the circumstances,including the age of the victim, his or her relationship to the trafficker or agents of the trafficker-: ap .any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be considered. (e) Consent by a victim of human trafficking who is a.minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section. (f) Mistake of fact as to the age of a victims of Duman trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is nota defense a criminal prosecution under this section. (g) The Legislature finds that the definition of human trafficking in this section is equivalent to the federal definition of a severe 'form of trafficking found in Section 7102(8) of Title 22 of the United States Code. ' (h) For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply: (1) "Coercion" includes any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage; or providing and facilitating the possession of any controlled substance to a person with the intent to impair the person's judgment,.. (2) "Com mercial sex act" means sexual conduct on account of which anything of value is given of received by any person. (3) "Deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another" includes substantial and sustained:restriction of another's liberty accomplished through force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person, under circumstances where the person receiving or apprehending the threat reasonably believes that it is likely that the person making the threat would carry it out. (4) "Duress" includes a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, hardship, or retribution sufficient to cause a reasonable person to acquiesce in or perform an act which he or she would otherwise not have submitted to or performed; a direct or implied threat to destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate, or possess any actual or purported passport or immigration June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 31 of 32 Human Sex Trafficking document of the victim; or knowingly destroying, concealing, removing, confiscating, or possessing any actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim. (5) "Forced labor or services" means labor or services that are performed or provided by a person and are obtained or maintained through force, fraud, duress, or coercion, or equivalent conduct that would reasonably overbear the will of the person. (6) "Great bodily injury" means a significant or substantial physical injury. (7) "Minor" means a person less than 18 years of age. (8) "Serious harm" includes any harm, whether physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all the surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing labor, services, or commercial sexual acts in order to avoid incurring that harm. (i) The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, the relationship between the'victim and the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be factors to consider in determining the presence of "deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another," "duress," and "coercion" as described in this section. June 23, 2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 32 of 32 MGM RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL AGENCY C.3 June 17, 2016 Mr. Greg Chanis, Town Manager Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 RECEIVED JUN 2 0 2016 TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE TOWN OF TIBURON Subject: Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Richardson's Bay Regional Agency member jurisdiction dues Dear Greg: The Board of the Richardson's Bay Regional Agency (RBRA) voted at their June 9, 2016 meeting to adopt the Agency budget for Fiscal Year 2016-2017. Consistent with pre -adoption discussions, contributions from member jurisdictions have not increased. The specific contribution requested from Town of Tiburon is $26,910. An invoice and the adopted RBRA budget are attached to this letter. A working group of City and Town managers and the County Administrator from RBRA member jurisdictions continues discussion regarding the potential for an enhanced enforcement program. We will keep you apprised of developments regarding these discussions. Any potential proposal would of course be presented to the RBRA Board at a future meeting for consideration. Among RBRA's many ongoing important functions are: the vessel registration program, yearly removal and demolition of 50-70+ derelict vessels and other navigational hazards that would otherwise sink or wash up on shore, hazardous material abatement, sanitary waste pumpouts for vessels, ongoing water quality programs, emergency response, ongoing shore cleanup, continuation of State -mandated pollution programs, and planning for future uses of Richardson's Bay. Thank you for your continued support, and please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Ben Berto RBRA Clerk Attachments: RBRA budget Dues spreadsheet Invoice cc: Councilmember Erin Tollini Dan Eilerman, County Administrator's Office c/o Marin Co. Community Development Agency, 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 308, San Rafael, CA 94903 Office 4151289-4143 Cell 415/971-3919 Pager 415/451-9595 RICHARDSON'S BAY REGIONAL AGENCY RECEIVED JUN 2 0 2016 TOWN W{ OF GERS T BURONICE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FEE 2016 - 2017 INVOICE TO: Town of Tiburon DATE: June 17, 2016 Attn: Greg Chanis Dues for Jurisdictions belonging to the Richardson Bay Regional Agency have been approved by the RBRA Board. There will be no change in any jurisdiction's contribution. Please pay the amount of $26,910 payable to RBRA. Mail to: Marin Community Development Agency c/o Ben Berto 3501 Civic Center Dr., Ste. 308 San Rafael, CA 94903 Your check for the above amount is due by August 1, 2016. As usual, anything you can do to expedite payment is appreciated. Thank you. Be : erto RBRA Clerk Eo O o 0 o O ,F r 00000 a) al 6 0 0 0 0 0 ✓ (1:4 2 >- U u - C ✓ ' - EA} 64 69. 64 69- 0 N >' - ��C) (00 co o (0 C.CD 0 ✓ CD r C") r ai LL a(0 1- N N CD r N � .. 0 r (1) 64 Efl 69- H} e} 69- 1— J >- (0 ) O in co O to a0 r 00 (O O a. lL W r M O M O (0 • d O V/ $1 'i T N (NI d) N LO 1.""' W< te QT vJ v! VS 0 z CO O 0 o g 16 to CO E H U LL D0a j 0 ¢ z -'U (1) H MILL BEL' TIB. SA MAF 0 H 16-17 approved budget split 060916 fnl ;;;;,.:•1 Est. 15/16 ACTUALS N I Z 0 010 0 N LL. SAVE salvage; salary; legal; county management 1 CD 0 q V} 1Phone, fax, Internet, mobile Office; slips/dry storage ($16k); heavy equip. rental ($128) Professional associations, continued education Harbormaster's Conference, mileage 0 (U J 0 0- 09•.N Patrol boat, pump -out boat maintenance :b (m 4Q Y:0 1 15/16 Modified Budget FY 2016.17 CUrrent.Memb. Budget C] 4 vrA 0 O r 0 OC N 0 0 N 0 coo 6' O N N (0 0 OC N 'fl 0 CO 0 0 q EA 0 CO 69 0 -'0 `�W Est. 15/16 ACTUALS $421,750 10 01 — to CD 0 q V} 0 0 0) C9 0 CO 0 N 49 0• V' 69 a M 0 0- 09•.N 0 (0 :b (m 4Q Y:0 1 15/16 Modified Budget '0 10 Q? c') •;") O 0 0 n O 0 C N 0 0 0 N 0 0 <O to 0 0 N N 0 0 C N 0 0 ('9 a 0 0 0 m 0 0' c0 to O .0 •in .• S : r 15/16 Adopted Budget O N QI M N o o O r1' o O P 0 0 O (N] 49 0 0 O 0 0 co N 0 O a N 0 (0 1') 0 0 O CO 0 O (O -• 1---• m O ti DESCRIPTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSURANCE PREMIUMS COMMUNICATION RENTAL & OPER. LEASES PROF. DEVEL. EXPENSES TRAVEL & MEETINGS PUBLICATION OFFICE EXPENSES MINT. & REPAIR - EOUIP OIL AND GAS •.._ _ - .TOTAkEXPENDITURES IBUDGETO 0 0_ O N 0 0 O N (0 N LO 5210700 5211200 O 0 N (0 1 5211400 O N N N 5220100 5220200 5220600 h 0 ifs c U 0 0 U cc cc Contractor cost TMDL testing Solano Co. Labs 5 O U 0 0. W -E U (d 0 .0 3 I -- N 0 N 0 a E m 3 Current Memb. Budget O 40 O 69 N 05 0 O N A co tri V) 10 (A O O 69 Est. 15/16 ACTUALS 0 '0 05 O o 0 to c co N (1) oi O co co R U9 0 0 N. m 0 (0 h '0 co 0 0) O 0 0), 0o a O n N a 15/16 Modified Budget $19,500 q o CV 0 o C m o Ifi 0 com a N m n N N 15/16 Adopted.Budget 0 000'LS 0 0 0- 0 0 0 m (a N. )` 0 QI a O co h ai a o c1 (o a) of 1 fCD (PROFESSIONAL. SERVICES BREAKOUT RAPID RESPONSE PROGRAM ulW SPECIAL APPOINTMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CDA ADMIN WASTE AWEIGH PROGRAM WEBSITE DEV & ADMIN SUBTOTAL- PROF SERVICES 0 5 JW Er F � CO 0 d 0 0 0 7 61 01 tort 0 a CL 0 U 001 U E 0 0 0, 4 0 U z d 0 •0 CC O (A O O CO') N (A O (0 CV 03 (0069. USE OF FUND BALANCE N CO COV VC10 C, o (H Q0 F 6 s O 0 0 cw 0 0 o) (l N (O cE: 0 0 0 o o a 0 0 0 r 0 '- or - A 6Q e 4 O N t D C C 0 ( Estimated remaining available fund balance @ 6/301 les (beginning unrestricted available fund balance: 593,995) usly anticipated $30k use of reserves in FY 15/16 for abatement) c7e6 Town of Tiburon Planning Division 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA. 94920 To Whom It May Concern, C -Y DIGEST JUN 2 2 2016 Vi PLANNING, As a Tong time resident of Tiburon living in the area adjacent to Blackie's Pasture, I am writing to request that the parking lot of Blackie's Pasture not be used as a regular staging area for noisy, dusty and annoying projects. Given the statement of the quality of life the Town openly prides itself on — I must admit that the residents of this particular area are too often subjected to terribly unsightly staging for various projects. Saturday morning at 5:15 AM large vehicles were moving around down there with their back up beeping emanating through the area. We look down on the parking lot and honestly might as well live in some commercial/industrial area rather than a town that has the highest per square foot property values in Marin. As I sit in my office right now... there is endless back up beeping all day long. You might just consider our quality of life when offering the parking lot for the next project planned. Thanks for your consideration, Resident of the Trestle Glen area. PARADE 2016 BELVEDERE-TIBURON LABOR DAY PARADE UNDER THE SEA SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 4TH Dear Honored Guest, RECEIVED JUN 2 2 2016 TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE TOWN OF 11BURON You are invited to participate as an honored guest in the 2016 Labor Day Parade! As an honored guest, you will ride in a car with your name and City/Town position on the side of the car. We will have a grandstand on Main Street and you will be announced as you pass by there as well! Your participation as a town or city dignitary is very important to the success of our local parade. We hope that you are able to join us. We ask that all participants line up for the parade at 1 pm on Lagoon Road, so we are ready to start at 2pm. We are requesting that dignitaries make their own arrangements with either classic car owners or owners of convertibles. I think this will eliminate much of the confusion that has transpired the past few years trying to match dignitaries with cars! RSVP to Jessica Hotchkiss (415) 435-4355 or Jhotchkiss@theranchtoday.orq. Concerts in the Park will follow directly after the parade at 4pm in Belvedere Park. Looking forward to a fantastic parade! Jessica Hotchkiss The Ranch - Recreation Youth Supervisor www.TheRanchToday.orq ,T ©Find us on Facebook FT -T8 U R 0 N 'HERITAGE I& A R TS COMMISSION Town of Tiburon Heritage & Arts Commission 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, CA 94920 415-435-7373 AGENDA HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION June 28 - Town Hall Conference Room - 6:30 p.m. DIGEST A -1 I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Oral Communications Persons wishing to address the Heritage & Arts Commission on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time. Please note however, that the Heritage & Arts Commission is not able to undertake extended discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission, Board, committee or staff for consideration or placed on a future Heritage & Arts agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes. IV. Minutes — May 24, 2015 V. Treasurer's Report — Liaison Pickett to report on budgets and expenditures VI. Artist Recruitment - New Artists for Exhibition (At each meeting, any Commissioner may present art work for consideration for future exhibits. Once approved by the group, the individual's samples will be turned over to one of the Artist Recruiters for scheduling and processing.) a. Discuss Artist Reception commissioner responsibilities and roster duty b. Lobby Artist — Jan Buscho - Reception — July 7 -THURSDAY — Duty Roster c. Banners- Update and new generic design presentation — Commissioner Smith d. Banner Conflict: Sept —1 Space available — 2 Receptions: Oct. 3:Photograhy group verses Oct. 9: Artist Laureate VII. Old Business a. Brochure — Update — Commissioner deQuattro : Cost analysis and decision on expenditures. b. Artist Laureate Project: Reception date: Oct. 9 Cost analysis and decision on expenditures c. Art Festival — Update — Commissioner Norris d. Chamber of Commerce — Formation of sub -committee to explore possibilities for art event collaboration VIII. New Business a. Town Historian Perpetual Plaque— Staff Report and Proposal b. New Artist Laureate — September 2016 — Start discussion/process IX. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting — TBD, 2016 June 15, 2016 JUN 2 0 20 i 6 TO: STATE, CITY AND LOCAL OFFICIALS NOTICE OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COIVIP •4.6 V w i ,JEST TO CHANGE TES FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION IN 2017 AND RETURN REVENUES FROM THE SALE OF GREENHOUSE GAS ALLOWANCES (A.16-06-003) DIGEST 0 Summary On June 1, 2016, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Company filed an application with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) requesting approval for the forecasted funding required in 2017 to obtain electricity on behalf of its customers. In addition, PG&E also requests approval of forecasted revenues from the sale of emissions allowances associated with California's Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction program. This application is referred to as the 2017 Energy Resource Recovery Account (ERRA) and Generation Non - bypassable Charges Forecast and Greenhouse Gas Forecast Revenue and Reconciliation (Application 16-06-003). If approved, this application will change electrical rates and customers' electric bills effective January 2017. PG&E's application primarily includes requests for approval of: 1. The forecasted recovery of $4.30 billion in electricity costs. These costs are associated with the fuel needed to produce electricity as well as the costs of buying electricity from third parties, such as renewable energy producers 2. The forecasted spending of $1.3 million for administrative and outreach expenses associated with California's GHG reduction program 3. The return of $312 million to eligible customers from the sale of GHG emissions allowances The use of all funds collected and the exact amounts may change and are subject to CPUC regulatory approval. PG&E will provide the CPUC with updated figures closer to when rates go into effect to ensure that the most current and accurate information available is used. About the filing The CPUC regulates and oversees all requests for any rate changes. PG&E would not profit from any of the requests in this application. The cost of energy is passed directly to PG&E's customers without any markup. If the CPUC approves the application, PG&E will begin to recover its costs in electric rates, effective January 1, 2017. At the end of 2017, to ensure all funds are used on the customers' behalf, PG&E will compare the actual costs to produce and purchase energy against revenues collected from customers and will incorporate any differences in next year's application. PG&E will return GHG allowance revenue to residential, small business and some industrial customers through rates and the California Climate Credit, based on methods determined by the state legislature and the CPUC. The revenue is intended to reduce the impact of the cost of the GHG reduction program on customers' electric rates. How will PG&E's application affect me? PG&E's request would result in a rate decrease for most customers. Altogether, PG&E proposes to reduce revenues collected from bundled service customers, who receive electric generation and distribution service from PG&E, by $439 million. The distribution of these rate changes to each customer class ultimately depends on the CPUC's final decisions. For the purpose of illustrating this application's proposed rate changes, PG&E has used the electric rate designs in effect as of March 24, 2016 for present rates, and using 2017 forecasted sales for both present and January 1, 2017 proposed rates. A table presenting a more illustrative description of the impact of this application was included in a bill insert announcing this filing that was sent directly to customers in the June 2016 billing cycle. PG&E estimates that a typical residential customer using 500 kWh per month would see an average bill decrease of $3.26 (or 3.3%) from $99.24 to $95.98. Individual customers' bill will differ. Eligible residential customers will receive a California Climate Credit twice a year, in April and October, on their electricity bills of approximately $27.87. How will PG&E's application affect non -bundled customers? Direct Access (DA) and Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) customers only receive electric transmission and distribution service from PG&E. Since PG&E does not obtain energy for these customers, PG&E's application addresses the cost responsibility of DA customers and CCA customers that purchase electricity from another provider but transport it through PG&E's electrical system. Eligible DA and CCA customers will receive GHG revenues. The net impact of PG&E's application on DA and CCA customers is $30 million, or an average increase of 2.5 percent. 1 • Another category -of pon-bundled customers is Departing Load (DL) customers. These customers do not receive electric generation, transmisslt3nnr ctts(ribt4�ion services from PG&E for their departing load. However, like DA and CCA customers, they are required by law or t ommiss'iontecfsion to pay certain non -bypassable charges, including the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA), Ongoing Competition Transition Charge (CTC), and Cost Allocation Mechanism (CAM). I he net impact on DL customers is a decrease of $1.3 million, or an average decrease of 4.1 percent. How do I find out more about PG&E's proposals? If you have questions about PG&E's filing, please contact PG&E at 1-800-743-5000. For TDD/TTY (speech -hearing impaired), call 1- 800-652-4712. Para mas detalles Ilame al 1-800-660-6789 • aA 1-800-893-9555. If you would like a copy of PG&E's filing and exhibits, please write to PG&E at the address below: Pacific Gas and Electric Company 2017 ERRA Forecast (16-06-003) P.O. Box 7442 San Francisco, CA 94120 A copy of PG&E's filing and exhibits are also available for review at the CPUC's Central Files Office by appointment only. For more information contact aljcentralflesid@cpuc.ca.gov or 1-415-703-2045. PG&E's application (without exhibits) is available on the CPUC's website at www.cpuc.ca.gov/. CPUC process This application will be assigned to an Administrative Law Judge (Judge) who will determine how to receive evidence and other related documents necessary for the CPUC to establish a record upon which to base its decision. Evidentiary hearings may be held where parties will present their testimony and may be subject to cross-examination by other parties. These evidentiary hearings are open to the public, but only those who are formal parties in the case can participate. After considering all proposals and evidence presented during the hearings, the assigned Judge will issue a proposed decision that may adopt PG&E's proposal, modify it or deny it. Any of the five CPUC Commissioners may sponsor an alternate decision. The proposed decision, and any alternate decisions, will be discussed and voted upon at a scheduled CPUC Voting Meeting. The Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) may review this application. ORA is the independent consumer advocate within the CPUC with a legislative mandate to represent investor-owned utility customers to obtain the lowest possible rate for service consistent with reliable and safe service levels. The ORA has a multi -disciplinary staff with expertise in economics, finance, accounting and engineering. For more information about ORA, please call 1-415-703-1584, email ora@cpuc.ca.gov or visit ORA's website at www.ora.ca.gov. Stay informed If you would like to follow this proceeding, or any other issue before the CPUC, you may use the CPUC's free subscription service. Sign up at: http://subscribecpuc.cpuc.ca.gov/. If you would like to learn how you can participate in the proceeding, have informal comments about the application, or if you have questions about the CPUC processes, you may access the CPUC's Public Advisor Office (PAO) webpage at http://consumers.cpuc.ca.gov/pao/. You may also contact the PAO as follows: Email: public.advisor@cpuc.ca.gov Mail: CPUC Public Advisor's Office 505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 2103 San Francisco, CA 94102 Call: 1-866-849-8390 (toll-free) or 1-415-703-2074 TTY: 1-866-836-7825 (toll-free) or 1-415-703-5282 If you are writing or emailing the PAO, please include the proceeding number (2017 ERRA Forecast, A.16-06-003). All comments will be circulated to the Commissioners, the assigned Judge and appropriate CPUC staff, and will become public record. 2 TIBURON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER WEDNESDAY, JUNE 8, 2016 6:30 P.M., HEADQUARTERS FIRE STATION 1679 TIBURON BLVD. DIGEST RIA - I 2. CONSENT CALENDAR All items under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and may be approved by one motion of the Board of Directors unless a request is made by a member of the Board, public or staff to remove an item for separate discussion and consideration. if you wish to speak on a Consent Calendar item, please seek recognition by the Board and do so at this time. A. Approval of Minutes, May 11, 2016 (Action) 3. COMMUNICATIONS 4. PUBLIC OPEN TIME for items not on the agenda This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons who want to address the Agency on any matter not listed on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act prohibits discussion of items that are not duly placed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Please Note: the Chair will allow time for public comment on each agenda item. 5. CHIEF'S REPORT A. Monthly Report (Discussion) B. Approve Step Raise — Captain/Fire Marshal Jessica Power, Range 325, Step #2, $8,874/mo., effective July 1, 2016 (Action) 6. TREASURER'S REPORT A. Finance Committee — Directors Sears and O'Neill (Discussion) Finance Committee Meeting —Wednesday, June 8, 2016, 1800 hrs. Headquarters Fire Station, 1679 Tiburon Blvd. B. Approve Warrants and Payroll (Action) 7. PUBLIC BUDGET HEARING AND FINAL BUDGET. F/Y 2016/17 A. Approve Resolution for Appropriation of Tax Proceeds, #2016-07 (Action) B. Approve Resolution that the Special Tax will not be levied for F/Y 2016/17, #2016-08 (Action) C. Approve Resolution of Annual Budget F/Y 2016/17, #2016-09 (Action) 8. RESOLUTIONS A. Approve Resolution authorizing Chief Pearce to sign the Joint Powers Agreement for Hazardous Materials Spills Management, #2016-10 (Action) 9. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. MERA — Chief Pearce (Discussion) B. SMEMPS — Director O'Neill (Discussion) C. PERSONNEL — President Kirchhoff and Director O'Neill (Discussion) 10. BOARD COMMENTS 11. ADJOURNMENT NEXT REGULAR TFPD BOARD MEETING: July 13, 2016, 6:30 P.M. A complete agenda package is available for viewing at 1679 Tiburon Blvd. Copies of past TFPD minutes are available for viewing at the same location. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the District office at 435-7zoo. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements.