September 15, 2004
Honorable Thomas P. Hansen, Presiding Judge
Santa Clara County Superior Court
191 North First Street
San Jose, CA 95113
Dear Judge Hansen:
This letter is in intended to serve as supporting documentation to the City of Sunnyvale’s response to the Civil Grand Jury’s report on “Inquiry into Police Evidence Rooms in Santa Clara County” as required by Penal Code Section 933.05.
Although the City of Sunnyvale was not one of the facilities physically inspected during the audit, staff did prepare a written response to a survey that was conducted in conjunction with the audit.
Finding I
The first finding of the Grand Jury relates to agencies performing regular or semi-regular audits of their evidence rooms. These are usually done upon change in management or staff associated with the function of Property and Evidence. Department personnel not directly involved in the evidence handling or its supervision usually perform this audit. Also, many departments periodically use a spot check of records against the physical item to test the integrity of the control system.
Recommendation I
The related recommendation is that a full performance and physical audit by a competent outside agency should be performed at least every four years, and the practice of spot check auditing should continue at least twice a year.
Department Action
Public Safety had a full performance and physical audit performed by a reputable outside vendor, Evidence Control Systems, in 2001. Follow-up spot-checks have been done with every change in department leadership and an external audit follow up will be scheduled in FY 2005/2006.
Finding II
The second finding relates to the overcrowded conditions of property and evidence rooms that results in expanding into rehabilitated rooms within existing facilities or renting off-site space.
Recommendation II A-C
The related recommendations include, completing a total inventory of their property and evidence and purge those items out of the secured storage area that can be returned to the owner or disposed of per California statute. The agencies should enforce the policy in existence or develop a policy of not holding found property for over 90 days, paying special attention to large items such as backpacks and bicycles. Finally the agencies should explore the development of a common facility within the county for the long-term storage of evidence and property, including biological evidence, and reduce the storage of evidence and property on the department premises to active cases and newly found property.
Department Action
Public Safety enforces department retention procedures when feasible, participates regularly in the public auction of approved property, and is in the process of identifying items to be purged that are no longer of value per statute. As conversations of a shared property facility begin at the County level, Public Safety will participate and keep abreast of any developments.
Finding III
The third finding states that there is no procedure in place for documenting the change of custody that occurs when police relinquish possession of evidence to the court for trial.
Recommendation III
The Grand Jury recommends that until a common policy for the transfer of evidence into the court system is adopted, that the departments obtain a court official’s signature on a dated receipt listing all evidence handed over to the jurisdiction of the court, with copies provided to the court. The same receipt should be signed and dated upon return of the listed property.
Department Action
The City of Sunnyvale currently uses a form that requires a signature from a court authority upon providing evidence and upon collection. Staff has been instructed to make two copies of the form, have both signed by the appropriate parties, leave one copy with the evidence and maintain the other copy with internal files. This is a process that will be in place until such time as a standard countywide form is implemented.
Finding IV
The fourth finding states that some evidence rooms do not vent narcotic holding areas separately from the main air conditioning systems.
Recommendation IV
It is recommended that agencies install an appropriate air venting system or move narcotic storage into a secure location where venting to the outside can be economically installed.
Department Action
Currently Public Safety’s narcotic evidence is stored in a secure area within the Evidence Room, under a separate alarm and separate from all other evidence. The ventilation is being addressed with Facilities Management in order to ensure that the security of the storage room is not jeopardized, but allowing for proper ventilation.
Finding V
The fifth finding refers to the lack of automation in some evidence rooms that increases the clerical workload, introduces the possibility of errors into the tracking system, and inhibits the timely identification of property records for final disposition.
Recommendation V
The recommendation of the Grand Jury is that agencies should acquire appropriate computer hardware and software to track evidence and property in and out of evidence rooms.
Department Action
Public Safety is now working with an automated barcode system that is fully integrated with our Tiburon Records Management System. This allows for one time entry of property and evidence into the system and automatic tracking of said property throughout its relevant time in the system.
Finding VI
The sixth finding refers to top management within the agencies often staying clear of evidence rooms.
Recommendation VI
The Grand Jury recommends that the Chief of Police, or equivalent, or his/her deputy should tour and review the evidence room at least annually to observe the working conditions for evidence room personnel, the condition of the evidence room, and the operating procedures.
Department Action
Public Safety supports this recommendation and will ensure that as a matter of procedure this is done on an annual basis.
Finding VII
The seventh and final finding referrers to the agencies in the county being members of CAPE and SCRAPE (professional associations), these affiliations provide opportunities to participate in procedural development, and networking at educational conferences.
Recommendation VII
The Grand Jury supports the continued participation in these professional associations and also recommends that agencies should explore the possibility of inspecting each other’s evidence rooms to share good techniques and ideas.
Department Action
Public Safety staff and supervisors are active members of both of the mentioned associations. We draw a considerable amount of information from our participation. We participate in the regular meetings and attempt to attend at least one trade conference per year in an effort to keep current with legislation and trends.
The City of Sunnyvale and the Department of Public Safety are proud of the Property and Evidence function and the staff who are committed to making it efficient and effective.
If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, please contact me at 408-730-7473.
Sincerely,
John N. Howe, Mayor