Grand Jury Urges Quick OK for Dump : Government: The panel’s statement on the proposed Weldon Canyon landfill is one of 77 recommendations in its final report.

The Ventura County grand jury on Wednesday urged swift approval of the proposed Weldon Canyon landfill, calling it “the most viable option available” for waste disposal in the west county.

“It is simply too late and costly to commence another protracted search and permitting process for yet another potential landfill site,” the 19 grand jurors wrote in their final report before being discharged.

The recommendation--one of 77 in the 130-page report on various aspects of county government--challenges a recent decision by the Board of Supervisors to put the 11-year-old Weldon Canyon proposal on hold while the county staff studies other options.

The Weldon Canyon landfill, which would be built by Waste Management Inc. in a canyon north of Ventura, would take waste now going to the soon-to-close Bailard Landfill in Oxnard. But the plan has been faulted on health and environmental grounds.

In dismissing those criticisms, the grand jury said most “are health and environmental factors that will be experienced in varying degrees at any landfill site.”

“Wrong, totally wrong,” said Ojai Councilwoman Nina V. Shelley, whose city opposes Weldon Canyon. She said she doubts that the report will carry much weight with the Board of Supervisors.

But Supervisor John K. Flynn, who favors an early vote on Weldon Canyon, said the grand jury recommendation should help get the matter back before the board quickly.

“I don’t think more studies are necessary,” Flynn said. “We need to vote on it, up or down.”

The grand jury also endorsed Waste Management as operator of Weldon Canyon. Citing a Ventura County Sheriff’s Department investigation of the company, the grand jury acknowledged that Waste Management has been the target of 215 civil or criminal actions in the past 14 years. But it also said the company is the largest waste-disposal firm in the world and has been under “almost microscopic examination” by all levels of government.

Elsewhere in its final report, the grand jury called for major improvements in the county library system, continuation of the district attorney’s no plea-bargaining policy, and empaneling of a second grand jury to decide on criminal indictments.

For the most part, the grand jury found little to criticize.

“We found Ventura County to be well-managed and effectively organized,” jury Foreman Robert J. Gallagher wrote in a forward to the report.

“It’s a low-profile grand jury report,” Flynn said. “As an elected person, it’s a good grand jury report.”

The report’s only major criticisms had been disclosed earlier this year, when the panel issued special reports on the county’s welfare fraud unit and its employee tuition reimbursement programs.

In its final report, the grand jury repeated its view that welfare fraud investigations would be better handled by the district attorney’s office than by the Public Social Services Agency. The panel also renewed its call for a tightening of tuition programs for county employees to ensure that the county pays only for training that it needs.

The grand jury--made up of citizens nominated by the Superior Court judges and selected by lot--is a centuries-old institution that performs three main functions: indictment of criminal suspects, charging of public officials with misconduct and oversight of local government operations.

In California, the third task takes up most of the panel’s time, and culminates in the annual report issued on the panel’s last day of service.

In recent years, however, the grand jury has devoted an increasing amount of time to criminal cases. Eventually, the report said, “the effectiveness of oversight functions will be increasingly diluted” unless a second grand jury is empaneled.

The 1990-91 grand jury also called for a second grand jury to handle criminal cases--a suggestion that has not been implemented.

Of the panel’s 77 recommended actions, 20 dealt with the county library system’s “dire need for attention.” In spite of “valiant efforts by a dedicated staff,” the system has fallen behind in its facilities, book collection and salaries, the report said.

But given the budget constraints faced by county and state government, the system will have to turn to the private sector and other sources to make improvements, the report said.

Among its recommendations was a call for each municipality served by the system to provide library facilities.

“That sounds very good,” said Alan Langville, community libraries division manager. “Buildings are probably our No. 1 problem. . . . We just can’t afford to build buildings.”

In other areas of the report, the grand jury:

* Recommended televising Board of Supervisors meetings on cable television. The report said televised meetings would make residents of the east county and remote areas feel closer to county government.

* Called on the county to hire a public information officer to improve communication with residents and media.

* Commended the county mental health agency for its “consistent efforts over the years toward mental health reform” and recent efforts to reorganize its services.

* Called for “drastic improvements” in county medical examiner facilities, which the report said are long overdue.

* Urged the county to build a new fire station in Oak View.

* Recommended that Camarillo do more to attract light industry and strive to lessen its reliance on sales-tax revenue.

Under the law, agencies targeted by the grand jury must respond to its suggestions but need not implement them.