In your grievance filed at North Unit, you claim you have been incorrectly charged for library books. You further assert that you returned the library books at the Tucson Complex prior to your transfer to Florence Complex. You are requesting a refund. Your grievance appeal has been reviewed at Central Office and the Deputy Warden's response is affirmed. Pursuant to DEPARTMENT ORDER 919 INMATE RESOURCE CENTER/LIBRARY SERVICES 919.03 CIRCULATION 1.3 Inmates shall: 1.3.2 Not be permitted to avoid responsibility for the late return or loss of materials checked out to or by them by claiming they were given to Department staff or other inmates to return. 919.04 DAMAGED AND LOST MATERIALS 1.2 Resource Center/library materials shall be considered lost when: …show more content…
919.05 FEES AND NOTICES 1.5 Inmates shall be subject to charges for damaged and lost Resource Center/library materials after 30 calendar days past the due date, as outlined in section 919.04 of this Department Order. The Tucson Complex Library has no record of your returning the library book. Therefore, you were appropriately charged in accordance with Department Order 919 Your request for a refund is
I have been a Library Assistant at the Palm Springs Library for a little over a year, and in that time I made progress in constructive relationships with my co-workers and supervisors. Suggested ways to improve work place procedures by increasing efficiency, enriched in my skills in customer service, active listening, and multitasking. My goals looking into the future is to improve on those skills; while gaining new skills and trying to avoid blunders. When time allows expand my role as Library Assistant to take in more responsibility. Keep continuing to provide a positive experience to our library
The intention to posting the paper’s citation on D2L was so that the student could look for the paper on the Ryerson Library website by using the given information. By figuring out how to use the library website and familiarizing themselves with the database system, future research purposes will be easier and more efficient when finding citable papers.
Their case was heard at the District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The District court agreed to grant the respondents a motion for summary judgment and charged the state to come up with a solution. The State proposed the “Library Plan” with which where they would establish 7 law library facilities, along with transportation to and from, and all supplies and materials needed for inmates to file legal petitions.
This appeal involves a dispute regarding the interpretation of overtime pay provisions outlined in the Howard County General Pay Plan (“HCGPP”). Appellant, Lynda Neser (“Neser”) contends that she was deprived of compensation to which she was entitled under certain provisions of the HCGPP. Neser filed a grievance with the Howard County Personnel Office. A personnel officer denied Neser’s grievance. Neser then appealed the personnel officer’s decision to the appellees, the Howard County Personnel Board (“the Board”). The Board adopted the findings of the personnel officer and affirmed the denial of Neser’s grievance. Neser then filed a petition for judicial review in the Circuit Court for Howard County. The circuit court affirmed the
This source was important because it allowed us to see what is ‘legally’ considered a bill of rights for a library. As this is from a national association for libraries, it can be inferred that our own library would have shared the same ideals. This was important for the usefulness of for the Strategic Plan as it allowed us to outline the rules that the library would have to follow and how it would likely deal with events in the library.
On the above date and time, I (Dep. Kelley-Dinkins) saw Inmate Cortez Washington open cell 41 door after standing outside waiting for it to be open. I yelled out to ask Inmate Washington was he going in to stay, because he was out for rec. He did not reply, he just stood there. Inmate Washington was later seen turning his back to the day room and when he turned around I saw the door to his cell cracked open. Inmate Washington then looked over to the deputy panel where I was sitting. I motioned for him to come to me. Washington stepped to the panel and tried to explain that he wanted his cup. I told Washington he would receive a disciplinary
In your grievance filed at Buckley Unit, you claim you requested an Inmate Wells 187589 be added to your Do Not House With list and COIII Jones refused your request. Your resolution is to have your disciplinary ticket removed from your record and transfer you to Rast Unit.
Uliano advised me that the defendant entered the store and concealed several Walmart items in several Walmart plastic bags that she brought into the store with her. The bags were then placed into a Walmart shopping cart.
In your grievance filed at Rast Unit, you claim the phone provider Century Link is over charging inmates for telephone calls. Your resolution is a lower rate for phone calls and for ADC to offer internet access to the inmate population.
In your grievance filed at Red Rock, you claim staff confiscated photos from your incoming mail. You further assert, Department Order 914 does not prohibit photos of the female anatomy from a medical perspective. Your resolution is to receive and possess the photos.
On 04/10/2018 I received an informal complaint from you, dated 04/10/2018. The topic of your informal complaint was a missing hobby craft that you claim to have dropped off at the Santa Cruz Unit programs office to COIII Keaton. In your complaint you stated that on March 1st you gave COIII Keaton a painting that you wanted to be included in a Tedx logo contest that was being held on March 2nd. You stated the painting needed to be turned into COIV Contreras, who was not in the programs office when you dropped the painting. You stated that COIII Keaton took possession of your painting, and told you that he would take it to COIV Contreras. You stated that on April 6th, Inmate Mounla #140057 informed you that your painting was lost, and that she confirmed this by asking COIV Contreras, COIV Flores, COIII Keaton, and Deputy Warden Theodore. You stated that inmate Mounla informed you that COIII Keaton stated that he did receive your painting, and that he immediately put it on COIV Contreras desk. Your proposed resolution was for your painting to be located.
Your grievance appeal has been reviewed at Central Office and the Contract Bed Bureau Administrator’s response is affirmed. You were removed from GED class due to your disruptive behavior which was witnessed by Instructor Perkowski.
A pair of cufflinks were vouchered and has not been pick-up/returned to owner. This property is consistent with the allegation of missing
In your grievance filed at Lumley Unit, you claim that you previously refused to participate in the GED program because you had already obtained your high school diploma. You further assert that your refusal subjected you to loss of Phase and pay rate. Your resolution is for DO 903 to be revised and allow inmates to receive a pay increase after a previous program refusal.
In your grievance filed at Central Unit, you claim you were told by Ms. Newman that you would be moved to CB1 if you complied with the program at Kasson Unit and achieved step two. You are requesting to be moved to CB1 immediately.