Humboldt County Grand Jury

2025-2026

6 reports

Findings & Recommendations 9 findings
F1: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Local law enforcement agencies can provide input into the Humboldt County Hazard Mitigation Plan and the Emergency Operations Plan, but many do not participate. Non-inclusion in the plans may hinder coordination with other first responders during a disaster. (R1, R2)
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: The Humboldt County Sheriff direct Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to encourage participation by law enforcement agencies in regular meetings by including standing law enforcement agency-relevant agenda items to gather input for the emergency plans by no later than December 31, 2026. (F1, F2, F3)
R2: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell direct their Police Chiefs to designate representatives to attend the regular meetings and provide input to the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services by no later than December 31, 2026. (F1, F2, F3)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F2: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Local law enforcement agency representatives typically do not attend regular Office of Emergency Services meetings due to time constraints or higher priority obligations. Irregular participation in these meetings limits their ability to share their experience and may also lead to reduced coordination with other first responders during a disaster. (R1, R2)
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: The Humboldt County Sheriff direct Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to encourage participation by law enforcement agencies in regular meetings by including standing law enforcement agency-relevant agenda items to gather input for the emergency plans by no later than December 31, 2026. (F1, F2, F3)
R2: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell direct their Police Chiefs to designate representatives to attend the regular meetings and provide input to the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services by no later than December 31, 2026. (F1, F2, F3)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F3: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Local government representatives (such as city managers) who do attend the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services meetings may not provide input from a law enforcement perspective. This lack of input can result in the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services not being fully aware of the priorities and requirements of local law enforcement agencies as it updates the Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Operations Plans. (R1, R2)
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: The Humboldt County Sheriff direct Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to encourage participation by law enforcement agencies in regular meetings by including standing law enforcement agency-relevant agenda items to gather input for the emergency plans by no later than December 31, 2026. (F1, F2, F3)
R2: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell direct their Police Chiefs to designate representatives to attend the regular meetings and provide input to the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services by no later than December 31, 2026. (F1, F2, F3)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F4: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The unique disaster response needs of local communities are known by experienced officers, but are not always articulated in local law enforcement agency disaster response documentation. As a result, new or less experienced officers may not have access to this information. (R3)
Related Recommendations (2)
R3: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell direct their Police Chiefs to ensure that a complete list of local disaster response needs, priorities, and protocols is included in their individual city disaster response documentation by no later than March 31, 2027. (F4)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F5: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Incident Command System training is a core component of California and national emergency response protocols, but is typically received by law enforcement officers only when they are at the police academy. This knowledge degrades without refresher training. (R4, R5, R6, R7, R8)
Related Recommendations (6)
R4: The Humboldt County Sheriff request the addition of scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Training Budget. (F5, F6, F7)
R5: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors add scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Training Budget. (F5, F6, F7) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors fund the expenses listed in R5 with existing appropriations in the next fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors, at its earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within Humboldt County.
R6: The Humboldt County Sheriff add scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training for Sheriff’s Office staff to the regular training schedule by no later than July 1, 2028. (F5, F6, F7)
R7: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add scenario-based ICS Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 local police department budget. (F5, F6, F7)
R8: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell direct their Police Chiefs to add scenario-based ICS Field Response Training to their regular training schedule, by no later than July 1, 2028. (F5, F6, F7)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F6: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Scenario-based Incident Command System training is not regularly conducted due to staffing constraints and budgetary limitations. As a result, local law enforcement officers may not be adequately trained in their disaster-response roles. (R4, R5, R6, R7, R8)
Related Recommendations (6)
R4: The Humboldt County Sheriff request the addition of scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Training Budget. (F5, F6, F7)
R5: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors add scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Training Budget. (F5, F6, F7) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors fund the expenses listed in R5 with existing appropriations in the next fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors, at its earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within Humboldt County.
R6: The Humboldt County Sheriff add scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training for Sheriff’s Office staff to the regular training schedule by no later than July 1, 2028. (F5, F6, F7)
R7: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add scenario-based ICS Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 local police department budget. (F5, F6, F7)
R8: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell direct their Police Chiefs to add scenario-based ICS Field Response Training to their regular training schedule, by no later than July 1, 2028. (F5, F6, F7)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F7: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: When held, scenario-based disaster response training typically focuses on agency coordination, mitigation, and planning, but often does not include the actual activities that need to be performed during a real event. As a result, law enforcement officers may not be adequately trained on the specific skills needed to respond to disasters in their communities. (R4, R5, R6, R7, R8)
Related Recommendations (6)
R4: The Humboldt County Sheriff request the addition of scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Training Budget. (F5, F6, F7)
R5: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors add scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Training Budget. (F5, F6, F7) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors fund the expenses listed in R5 with existing appropriations in the next fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors, at its earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within Humboldt County.
R6: The Humboldt County Sheriff add scenario-based Incident Command System Field Response Training for Sheriff’s Office staff to the regular training schedule by no later than July 1, 2028. (F5, F6, F7)
R7: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add scenario-based ICS Field Response Training as a separate line item within the FY 2027-2028 local police department budget. (F5, F6, F7)
R8: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell direct their Police Chiefs to add scenario-based ICS Field Response Training to their regular training schedule, by no later than July 1, 2028. (F5, F6, F7)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F8: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Some specialized disaster response equipment is unavailable or not adequately maintained by local law enforcement agencies due to budgetary limitations. As a result, these agencies may be unable to respond effectively or efficiently to local disasters. (R9)
Related Recommendations (1)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F9: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Availability of specialized disaster response equipment is less of an issue for the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office. This allows them to respond to local disasters more effectively themselves and to serve as a potential source of equipment for local agencies.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9: The city councils for Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell, after consultation with their respective police chiefs, add specialized disaster response equipment, maintenance, and training/certification as separate line items within the FY 2027-2028 local Police Department Budget. (F8) Funding Recommendation: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local City Councils fund the expenses listed in R7 and R9 with existing appropriations in the current fiscal year. If current appropriations are not sufficient, the Grand Jury recommends that City Councils, at their earliest opportunity, pursue additional funding from an appropriate organization, including state or federal agencies. Additionally, the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommends that local city councils reassess funding priorities to give greater priority to all areas of emergency management and response within their respective cities. RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, including an explanation, the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame 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, where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (F5, F6, F7) and (R5) The Arcata City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell City Council (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F9) and (R1, R4, R6) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The Arcata Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Eureka Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Ferndale Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Fortuna Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) The Rio Dell Police Department Chief of Police (All findings) and (R2, R3, R7, R8, R9) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
Findings & Recommendations 7 findings
F1: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Both the Fortuna Public Works Department and the McKinleyville Community Services District are working diligently which will ensure water and wastewater services continue to be available for users.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: When the 2029 water study is complete, the Fortuna City Council redouble efforts to inform the public of results of the 2029 water rate study by sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets, and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes. This is to start by no later than one month after the study completion. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Fortuna City Council (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) and (all recommendations) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The McKinleyville Community Services District (F1, F7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F2: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Despite considerable efforts of many water districts to communicate with users, people are often unaware of rate increases until a larger bill arrives. (R2, R3)
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: The Fortuna City Council communicate to Fortuna customers that this yet to be commissioned water rate study (referenced in R1) will likely recommend increasing rates beginning in fiscal year 2029-2030 to provide funds to maintain and upgrade water and sewer systems. This is to be done by no later than January 31, 2029. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6)
R3: When the 2029 water study is complete, the Fortuna City Council redouble efforts to inform the public of results of the 2029 water rate study by sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets, and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes. This is to start by no later than one month after the study completion. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Fortuna City Council (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) and (all recommendations) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The McKinleyville Community Services District (F1, F7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F3: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Fortuna’s infrastructure is aging faster than it is being upgraded, therefore creating greater maintenance costs and deterioration of the system. (R1, R2,
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: The Fortuna City Council commission a new water rate study to be completed and presented to City Council no later than April 15, 2029. (F3, F4, F5, F6)
R2: The Fortuna City Council communicate to Fortuna customers that this yet to be commissioned water rate study (referenced in R1) will likely recommend increasing rates beginning in fiscal year 2029-2030 to provide funds to maintain and upgrade water and sewer systems. This is to be done by no later than January 31, 2029. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6)
R3: When the 2029 water study is complete, the Fortuna City Council redouble efforts to inform the public of results of the 2029 water rate study by sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets, and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes. This is to start by no later than one month after the study completion. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Fortuna City Council (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) and (all recommendations) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The McKinleyville Community Services District (F1, F7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F4: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Municipalities and districts which fail to provide adequate funding for water and wastewater systems may incur higher maintenance costs which negatively affects the amount of money available for upgrades. (R1, R2, R3)
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: The Fortuna City Council commission a new water rate study to be completed and presented to City Council no later than April 15, 2029. (F3, F4, F5, F6)
R2: The Fortuna City Council communicate to Fortuna customers that this yet to be commissioned water rate study (referenced in R1) will likely recommend increasing rates beginning in fiscal year 2029-2030 to provide funds to maintain and upgrade water and sewer systems. This is to be done by no later than January 31, 2029. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6)
R3: When the 2029 water study is complete, the Fortuna City Council redouble efforts to inform the public of results of the 2029 water rate study by sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets, and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes. This is to start by no later than one month after the study completion. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Fortuna City Council (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) and (all recommendations) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The McKinleyville Community Services District (F1, F7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F5: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The City of Fortuna failed to complete a five-year plan during an 18-year period, contributing to insufficient system upgrades and a greater cost burden for maintenance. (R1, R2, R3)
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: The Fortuna City Council commission a new water rate study to be completed and presented to City Council no later than April 15, 2029. (F3, F4, F5, F6)
R2: The Fortuna City Council communicate to Fortuna customers that this yet to be commissioned water rate study (referenced in R1) will likely recommend increasing rates beginning in fiscal year 2029-2030 to provide funds to maintain and upgrade water and sewer systems. This is to be done by no later than January 31, 2029. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6)
R3: When the 2029 water study is complete, the Fortuna City Council redouble efforts to inform the public of results of the 2029 water rate study by sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets, and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes. This is to start by no later than one month after the study completion. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Fortuna City Council (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) and (all recommendations) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The McKinleyville Community Services District (F1, F7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F6: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The City of Fortuna did not raise its rates for water and wastewater between 2011-2024 while operating costs steadily rose, resulting in the city having to delay needed infrastructure improvements. (R1, R2, R3)
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: The Fortuna City Council commission a new water rate study to be completed and presented to City Council no later than April 15, 2029. (F3, F4, F5, F6)
R2: The Fortuna City Council communicate to Fortuna customers that this yet to be commissioned water rate study (referenced in R1) will likely recommend increasing rates beginning in fiscal year 2029-2030 to provide funds to maintain and upgrade water and sewer systems. This is to be done by no later than January 31, 2029. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6)
R3: When the 2029 water study is complete, the Fortuna City Council redouble efforts to inform the public of results of the 2029 water rate study by sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets, and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes. This is to start by no later than one month after the study completion. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Fortuna City Council (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) and (all recommendations) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The McKinleyville Community Services District (F1, F7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F7: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Due to FEMA not releasing money previously granted to the District, McKinleyville Community Services District will need to find money to replace funding expected from FEMA for several infrastructure improvement projects in progress.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: When the 2029 water study is complete, the Fortuna City Council redouble efforts to inform the public of results of the 2029 water rate study by sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets, and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes. This is to start by no later than one month after the study completion. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Fortuna City Council (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6) and (all recommendations) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond. The McKinleyville Community Services District (F1, F7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
Additional Recommendations 4

Not linked to specific findings.

R4: Hazard Mitigation Plan FEMA requires local governments to have an approved Hazard Mitigation Plan to be eligible for certain federal funding and assistance programs. The plan also identifies risks and vulnerabilities, as well as actions that can be taken to reduce these issues and enable a faster recovery. Plans must be updated every five years.
R5: Urban Water Management Plan The key benefits of an Urban Water Management Plan are clean drinking water, reliable sanitation, and wastewater disposal. Other benefits include controlling storm runoff and risk management. On the economic side, the plan also seeks to reduce waste and operational costs. The idea is to build a sustainable, healthy, and resilient environment. One compliance element of this plan is the California Department of Water Resources requirement that every water supplier serving more than 3,000 connections must submit this plan every five years.
R6: Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence This is an analysis of municipal services within a certain geographic area that is required by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). A LAFCO oversees the establishment, expansion, governance, and dissolution of local government agencies and their municipal services. The study looks at population, growth, services, fiscal health, governance, and opportunities for improvement and should be completed every five years. Municipal Service Reviews are often required before or in conjunction with a Sphere of Influence plan. The Sphere of Influence provides a framework for assessing whether an area is likely to need municipal water, wastewater, or related services in the future. It informs decisions on where and when to expand or reorganize services. This plan should be updated five years or as needed. E. Capital Reserves and Funding There is no single law that requires a water or wastewater facility to maintain a capital reserve. However, Sections 20200–20220 of the California Water Code requires facilities to be financially responsible for adequate funds for capital improvement plans. The California Code of Regulations, enforced by the State Water Resources Control Board, sets operational, environmental, and financial standards for water and wastewater facilities, ensuring adequate funding and financial reporting occur. The bottom line is the fact that fees based only on the usage of water and sewers alone do not meet the financial needs of water and sewer systems. Why? For all the reasons listed above. For providers of these water utilities to remain financially viable, other sources are needed. Funding sources to cover the gap in revenue obtained by entities and the cost of maintaining adequate capital reserves can include the sources below. Several Humboldt communities have been aided in paying for improvements from these resources:
R84: They now have enough water to ensure coverage of maximum daily usage, and to handle outages due to natural disasters or other emergencies.
Findings & Recommendations 5 findings
F1: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Budgetary constraints on the County of Humboldt impact the ability for the County Planning and Building Department to successfully recruit and retain qualified staff. The resulting loss of experienced staff, turnover and longer vacancies make it difficult for the Department to adequately serve the public. (R1)
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors direct the Planning and Building Department Director to evaluate and report whether positions could be consolidated or currently vacant positions could be eliminated, allowing the resulting budget savings to be used to increase compensation for positions that are difficult to recruit for and retain. This report is to be completed and presented to the Board of Supervisors by January 1, 2027. (F1)
F2: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Records of complaints are not being retained as prescribed by the County Planning and Building Department’s Customer Feedback System. This results in reduced transparency, accountability, independent oversight, and missed operational improvements that could be possible by analyzing customer feedback for trends or patterns. (R2, R3)
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors direct the Planning and Building Department Director to reinstitute, maintain, and publicize the Department’s Customer Feedback System. This system should be re-implemented by December 31, 2026. (F2)
R3: If the existing Customer Feedback System is not reinstituted, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors should direct the Planning and Building Department Director to implement a new complaint management system, and inform the public of its existence and how to access it. This system should be implemented by March 31, 2027. (F2)
F3: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The County Planning and Building Department does not appear to have a procedure for surveying or polling its customers in advance of making impactful changes. This reduces the ability of the Department to use customer input to improve the Department’s performance and reputation. (R4)
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors direct the Planning and Building Department Director to create and implement a method to survey or poll customers prior to implementing departmental changes that significantly impact the community, by no later than March 31, 2027. (F3)
F4: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The County Planning and Building Department’s homepage does not prominently and clearly display its hours of operation. This reduces public access to services, extends processing times, and delays or impedes completion of projects. (R5)
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors direct the Planning and Building Department Director to update the Department’s homepage to prominently display public hours, by no later than December 31, 2026. (F4)
F5: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The County Planning and Building Department’s homepage does not state that appointment times are available during non-public hours. This reduces public access to services, extends processing times, and delays or impedes completion of projects. (R6)
Related Recommendations (1)
R6: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors direct the Planning and Building Department Director to update the Department’s homepage to prominently inform the public it can schedule appointments to occur during non-public hours, by no later than December 31, 2026. (F5) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 90 DAYS The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors (All findings, all recommendations) INVITED RESPONSE The Director of the Humboldt County Planning and Building Department (All findings, all recommendations) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
Findings & Recommendations 8 findings
F1: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Eureka City School District serves as a strong example of how comprehensive emergency preparedness protocols and coordinated districtwide procedures can foster consistency, operational continuity, and a shared understanding across schools, therefore enhancing student safety.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F2: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Fortuna Elementary Schools provide an exemplary, clear, and informative pamphlet on emergency preparedness for parents to understand their role in a school disaster, reducing fear and maintaining consistency across the district.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F3: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Laurel Tree Charter School has a commendable safety plan that is simple and concise, delivering important information for staff and parents so they can act quickly and correctly.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F4: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The two schools actually in the tsunami hazard zone (Peninsula Union and Redwood Coast Montessori schools) have effective plans and regular drills, keeping students and staff safe.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F5: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Humboldt County Office of Education offers substantial support and resources to individual schools for CSSPs and disaster preparedness, better preparing schools for emergencies.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F6: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Humboldt County Office of Education does not currently review school safety plans to identify specific best practices, therefore, missing an opportunity to improve safety plans throughout the county. (R1)
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to review schools' safety preparedness plans and identify effective disaster safety practices, particularly those that clearly communicate parents’ roles and responsibilities during emergencies. These best practices should be shared with school districts countywide by no later than December 31, 2026. (F6)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F7: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Humboldt County Office of Education does not use its regular forums for the schools and districts to share best practices, therefore, missing an opportunity to improve safety plans throughout the county. (R2)
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to expand at least one forum a year to allow the schools to share disaster preparedness best practices, information and ideas. This forum is to take place before the 2027-2028 school year. (F7)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
F8: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Many schools located outside tsunami hazard zones do not include tsunami preparedness measures in their safety plans for school activities or field trips that require travel through or into tsunami hazard areas. This lack of planning can place students and staff at increased risk during a tsunami emergency. (R3)
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education direct staff to encourage schools and districts to include tsunami preparedness for offsite school activities in their 2027 safety plans. (F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSE – WITHIN 60 DAYS The Superintendent of the Humboldt County Office of Education (F5, F6, F7, F8) and (R1, R2, R3) Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Superintendent of Eureka City Schools (F1) The Superintendent of the Fortuna Elementary School District (F2) The Administrator of the Laurel Tree Charter School (F3) The Superintendent of the Peninsula Union School District (F4) The Director of Redwood Coast Montessori - Manila (F4) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.
Findings & Recommendations 8 findings
F1: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The City of Eureka exhibits foresight in assisting local businesses in the tsunami hazard zone to become tsunami prepared by sponsoring the Tsunami Preparedness Workshop for Businesses, improving safety and reducing risk.
F2: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The Ink People, Eureka Main Street, Wiyot Tribe and the Eureka Cultural Arts District Leadership Council are collaborating on an educational tsunami art mural project to bring tsunami awareness to visitors and residents alike, increasing safety.
F3: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Humboldt County tsunami sirens are costly, inadequately funded, and nearly all are non-functional, leaving large tsunami hazard zone areas without siren coverage. (R1)
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: The Humboldt County Sheriff direct the Program Manager of the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to further publicize that Humboldt County’s outdated siren system will not be replaced or expanded. This should be completed by the conclusion of Tsunami Week, 2027. (F3)
F4: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: “Blue line” markings that indicate "Leaving Tsunami Zone" have proven effective and economical in drawing public awareness to where safety lies in the event of a tsunami, providing quick, instantly understandable emergency directions and reducing risks. (R2)
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: The Eureka City Council direct the City Manager and city staff to, as time and resources allow, apply for eligible grant funding for a “blue line” project to be engineered and installed in Eureka. Grant applications should be submitted during the next feasible grant cycle. (F4)
F5: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Local printed tourist maps do not indicate tsunami hazard zone boundaries; this is a missed opportunity to educate visitors where the tsunami hazard zones are. (R3)
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The Eureka City Council direct the City Manager and city staff to update the visitors map to include color-coded tsunami hazard and safe zones, in coordination with California Geological Survey maps color-coding. We recommend this be done the next time the maps are updated and reprinted. (F5)
F6: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Eureka Old Town kiosks do not include maps with color-coded tsunami hazard and safe zones; this is a missed opportunity to educate visitors where the tsunami hazard zones are. (R4)
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: The Eureka City Council direct the City Manager and city staff to update the kiosks to include maps with color-coded tsunami hazard and safe zones, in coordination with California Geological Survey maps color-coding. We recommend that this be done the next time the kiosks are renovated or updated. (F6)
F7: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Alaska-based federally operated tsunami wireless alert systems have historically been targeted to overly broad areas of the west coast, resulting in local false alarms, confusion and needless panic. (R5, R6, R7)
Related Recommendations (3)
R5: The Humboldt County Sheriff direct the Program Manager of the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to assess its current local wireless alert system for geolocation functionality and report to the Sheriff by September 30, 2026. (F7, F8)
R6: If geolocation is available on the current alert system used by Humboldt County, the Humboldt County Sheriff direct the Program Manager of the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to implement geolocation by Tsunami Week, 2027. (F7, F8)
R7: If the current local wireless alert system does not have the ability to send alerts based on geolocation, the Humboldt County Sheriff direct the Program Manager of the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to compare the current system to other systems which provide geolocation capability, evaluate available funding, and submit a report on the outcome of that research to the Sheriff by December 31, 2026. (F7, F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSES - WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F3, F7, F8, R1, R5, R6, R7) REQUIRED RESPONSES - WITHIN 90 DAYS The Eureka City Council (F1, F4, F5, F6, R2, R3, R4) INVITED RESPONSES The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services Program Manager (F3, F7, F8, R1, R5, R6, R7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury. APPENDIX A
F8: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Current Humboldt Alert wireless messages are sent based on residential addresses rather than using geolocation technology to pinpoint the actual physical location of the person’s phone. This can result in people who do not live in a tsunami hazard zone missing an alert during an actual tsunami event. (R5,
Related Recommendations (3)
R5: The Humboldt County Sheriff direct the Program Manager of the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to assess its current local wireless alert system for geolocation functionality and report to the Sheriff by September 30, 2026. (F7, F8)
R6: If geolocation is available on the current alert system used by Humboldt County, the Humboldt County Sheriff direct the Program Manager of the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to implement geolocation by Tsunami Week, 2027. (F7, F8)
R7: If the current local wireless alert system does not have the ability to send alerts based on geolocation, the Humboldt County Sheriff direct the Program Manager of the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services to compare the current system to other systems which provide geolocation capability, evaluate available funding, and submit a report on the outcome of that research to the Sheriff by December 31, 2026. (F7, F8) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: • The respondent agrees with the finding; or • 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: • The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or • The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or • The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or • The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. REQUIRED RESPONSES - WITHIN 60 DAYS The Humboldt County Sheriff (F3, F7, F8, R1, R5, R6, R7) REQUIRED RESPONSES - WITHIN 90 DAYS The Eureka City Council (F1, F4, F5, F6, R2, R3, R4) INVITED RESPONSES The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury also invites the following entities or individuals to respond: The Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services Program Manager (F3, F7, F8, R1, R5, R6, R7) Responses are to be sent to both: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning California Superior Court for Humboldt County 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury. APPENDIX A
Findings & Recommendations 6 findings
F1: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The Eel River Conservation Camp meets or exceeds goals for contributions to the community, leading to a healthy, trusting relationship between the camp and the community.
F2: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Basic job skills are learned and practiced, making Eel River Conservation Camp inmates more employable and thus benefitting themselves, their families and their communities.
F3: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Through training, education, and on-the-job work experience, inmate employment opportunities post-incarceration increase, helping the Eel River Conservation Camp recidivism rate decline.
F4: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: The Humboldt community enjoys considerable cost savings by using inmate labor for projects such as weed abatement, prescribed burns, fuel reduction, rebuilding trails in state parks, landscape maintenance in public places and other special projects.
F5: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Temporary overcrowding conditions due to dormitory renovations occurring during the Grand Jury’s November, 2025, visit had been remediated by the December, 2025 visit, improving inmate living conditions and wellbeing.
F6: The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury finds that: Internet service that supports staff is unreliable and the transfer speed is substandard. This hampers staff’s ability to work efficiently and reliably. (R1)
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: Upgrade the slower of the Eel River Fire Camp internet networks to current standards for upload and download internet speeds by July 1, 2027. (F6) RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● 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 therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame 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 where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. Invited Responses The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury invites the following entity to respond. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations (All findings, all recommendations) Responses are to be sent to: The Honorable Judge Timothy A. Canning Humboldt County Superior Court 825 5th Street, Eureka, CA 95501 The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury PO Box 657; Eureka, CA 95502 A Reports issued by the 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 Grand Jury.