Orange County Grand Jury
• 2018-2019
• Agency Response
Response to:
County of Orange Executive Officer 09/10/19
City of Orange*
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 11 findings
F1
Information sent out about evacuations during the Canyon 2 fire to be inconsistent, and confused residents. Response The City wholly disagrees with this finding as it relates to the City of Orange. While the Canyon 2 Fire was a dynamic and fast moving incident, residents in the City of Orange were frequently informed of quickly changing evacuation zones through various communication channels. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Some emergency management personnel, tasked with creating and disseminating Emergency Public Information, in a rapidly-evolving, multijurisdictional emergency did not fully understand their roles and responsibilities. ORANGE, CA 92866-1591 P.O. BOX 449 300 E. CHAPMAN AVE. . ORANGE CIVIC CENTER PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Hon. Kirk H. Nakamura September 17, 2019 Response The City wholly disagrees with this finding as it relates to the City of Orange. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F3
No training standards for Public Information Officers exist and there are no formal written protocols for issuance of mass notification, including required training on the use of mass notification systems Response The City wholly disagrees with this finding as it relates to the City of Orange. All three PIO's in the City at the time of the Canyon 2 Fire were well trained public information officials. The designated PIO's for the Orange Police Department and the Orange Fire Department had received certifications through their specific public safety disciplines. The City's PIO had received his certification through the California Public Information Official organization. As to training and written protocols for mass notification systems, the City disagrees in part with this finding. Training on Alert OC was required and completed by City of Orange staff, however certain written protocols were lacking. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The County's vendor for the alert OC mass notification system had not updated its GIS mapping software, so some residents in newer neighborhoods did not receive an Alert OC message during the Holy Jim fire. Response The City neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding as it does not apply to the City of Orange. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The lack of a standardized written protocol for Alerts and Warnings decreases the ability of the County and its Operational Area jurisdictions to speak with one voice when it comes to alerting the public during emergencies. Response The City agrees with this finding. Hon. Kirk H. Nakamura September 17, 2019 Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F6
The outdated hotline telephone technology at the County Emergency Operations Center cannot track caller metrics, so staffing decisions are made based on observing the length of time between incoming phone calls. Response The City neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding as it does not apply to the City of Orange. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F7
During the Canyon 2 fire, procedures allowing some hotline workers to pass road closures were ineffective, which led to a shortage of operators during the first day of the fire. Response The City neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding as it does not apply to the City of Orange. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F8
Some hotline operators are not current on the use of the software for logging incoming phone calls, thus decreasing their efficiency. Response The City neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding as it does not apply to the City of Orange. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F9
The County and interviewed cities do not seek sufficient public feedback of the perceptions of effectiveness of the Emergency Public Information. Hon, Kirk H. Nakamura September 17, 2019 Response The City wholly disagrees with this finding as it relates to the City of Orange. Soon after the Canyon 2 Fire, members of the Orange Fire and Police Departments met with representatives from Orange Park Acres and surrounding communities to obtain feedback on evacuation procedures. Recently, follow-up meetings were conducted with these groups in which updated evacuation procedures were reviewed. In addition, the City of Orange has established channels to solicit and obtain resident feedback via the City's website and through a long-standing City Hotline phone number. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The lack of standardized emergency management terminology among the various jurisdictions within Orange County causes delays and confusion in the dissemination of Emergency Public Information. Response The City wholly disagrees with this finding. Finding
No recommendations for this finding
F11
Orange County jurisdictions and the California Highway Patrol lack a joint plan for evacuation routes, thus evacuations can be chaotic, creating increased potential for danger to residents. Response: The City agrees with this finding. Since the Canyon 2 Fire, the City has been working with the City of Anaheim, the California Highway Patrol and other adjacent jurisdictions to define evacuation routes based on the nature and location of the incident. Recommendation:
No recommendations for this finding
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.