Score: +4
(13/19/9)
Monterey County Grand Jury
• 2019-2020
• Agency Response
Monterey County, California Ff's Office Sheriff-Coroner Keeping the peace since 1850 August 15, 2019 Honorable*
Published: August 15, 2019
3 pages
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and recommendations have not been extracted yet.
The full report content may still be accessible via the PDF link above.
Agency Responses 7
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
▶
City of Monterey Response to Sexual Harassment Prevention #Training Compliance
September 18, 2020
•
7 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
The RMA Services Manager should review and improve the RMA Current Planning division’s work practices for RMA planners and Planning managers. Critical thinking, attention to detail, and higher professional standards must be imbued into the RMA Planning process. When County Code directs higher levels of decision making, RMA Planning should require assigning higher level, more experienced planners and higher-level supervisors to prepare and review those applications. (F3, F7) This review should be...
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
r 1, 2020. On behalf of the Monterey City Council, I would like to assure you that the City of Monterey has consistently been ahead of the curve in sexual harassment prevention training. For example, the City of Monterey started to train all employees, not just supervisors, four years before the law required such action. In addition, the City adopted a zero-tolerance standard which is more protective to employees than the state law severe and pervasive standard, and implemented bystander intervention training two years before it was recommended as a best practice by the legislature. The City's...
R18
The city should develop a practice to individually counsel and refer new and promoted supervisors to online training when classroom training is not available of their hire. Those employees also should be encouraged to take the next session of in-person classroom training to reinforce the city’s culture of respect. This recommendation should be completed no later than six months after this report is published. 62
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 18, 2020 The Honorable Stephanie E. Hulsey Judge of the Superior Court of California County of Monterey 240 Church Street Salinas, CA 93901 Re: Response to 2019-2020 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report – "Sexual Harassment Prevention #TrainingCompliance" Dear Judge Hulsey, This letter is in response to the Monterey Civil Grand Jury Final Report - "Sexual Harassment Prevention #TrainingCompliance" pursuant to Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05. The responses contained in this correspondence were approved by the City of Monterey City Council at its regular meeting of Septembe
▶
County of Monterey Response to Enhancing Public Access to Pesticide Use Information, An Opportunity
March 19, 2020
•
7 pages
• 9 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
9 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The “gap-in-service” nature of this cell tower Use Permit request meant that a facility in some location in this South County area was required to be approved in order to comply with 47 U.S. Code §332. (c)(7)(b)(ii)). 38
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F1: The Monterey County Agricultural Commissioner's Office (MCACO) agrees in part with the finding. The MCACO agrees that there is a "genuine" need for residents of Monterey County and other interested groups to have access to unbiased, scientifically reviewed information about pesticides. The MCACO website has "...a vast array of information about the use of pesticides, including links to State Agencies and other relevant sources." The MCACO disagrees that there is a "prevalent" need for residents of Monterey County and other interested groups to have access to unbiased, scientifically review...
R1
The RMA Services Manager should review and improve the RMA Current Planning division’s work practices for RMA planners and Planning managers. Critical thinking, attention to detail, and higher professional standards must be imbued into the RMA Planning process. When County Code directs higher levels of decision making, RMA Planning should require assigning higher level, more experienced planners and higher-level supervisors to prepare and review those applications. (F3, F7) This review should be...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R1. Within budget limitations and personnel constraints, MCACO should create a simple, accessible forum on MCACO website that is general-public focused, and that publicizes relevant pesticide information directly to the Monterey County community. This website forum should be bilingual in content (English/Spanish). This recommendation should be completed within one year of the publication of this report. Response to
F2
The difference between the Board of Supervisors’ Resolution 15-043 No.7 April 28, 2015 use of the name “Bradley-Parkfield LUAC” and the Monterey County official Website use of the name “South County LUAC” for the same LUAC, created confusion that contributed to an RMA planner’s misunderstanding about the South County LUAC.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F2: The MCACO agrees in part with the finding. The MCACO agrees that MCACO's mission means that it can play a central role as a forum for fact-based and authoritative information to the public about pesticide-related facts and issues. The MCACO, to the extent feasible given available staff and funding resources, is already playing a central role as a forum to the public by publishing and providing fact-based and authoritative invited to share their subject-matter expertise. Also, through its dedicated staff, the MCACO is already answering queries from the public about pesticide-related facts a...
R2
The Director of RMA should investigate whether the erroneous description of PLN 180317 alternative site’s conditions, as provided to RMA Planning in support of that application, constituted “false material information,” as the term is used in Monterey County Code 21.70.070 (Revocation). Director RMA should then determine if action in accordance with that code is appropriate or necessary for PLN 180317. (F4) This investigation and determination should be completed no later than 90 days after the ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R2: The recommendation will be evaluated as staff resources and funding become available to expand to other social media portals, outlets and/or platforms. The MCACO already has a website and for the first time, as of last year, a Facebook page that are simple, accessible forums that are general-public focused and publicize relevant pesticide information directly to the Monterey County community. - 61 * purview that might develop or create public interest or concern. This should be operational within six months of the publication of this report. Response to
F3
The RMA Planning draft resolution and briefing for the Application both inaccurately asserted that (1) South County had no LUAC, and (2) that the Application did not need to be sent to the LUAC for review. These errors denied a required hearing and stifled public voice on design and local considerations for a large, visible project.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F3: The MCACO agrees in part with the finding. As recently as last year, the MCACO launched and availed itself to a Facebook page. Since then, the MCACO has endeavored to communicate timely and most recent information in both English and Spanish. The MCACO does not agree that it has not availed itself of the ever-expanding range of other outreach opportunities, including other social media outlets. As stated under the finding, the MCACO has, for the first time, created a Facebook account and understands there are other social media platforms from which MCACO could communicate information to th...
R20
The city should publish an updated Employee Handbook that
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R 20-083 County of Monterey, State of California Agenda Item No.: 15.1 Joel G. Paplo, Deputy
R22
By June 30, 2022, the city should continue to advance HR integration and automation of training processes and functions. This should include (1) automated notices or “ticklers” to supervisors on AB 1825 training deadlines, (2) integrating online training records with the New World ERP system, and (3) routinely creating global city reports of compliance that can provide HR and senior city leadership with a comprehensive snapshot of AB 1825 training compliance by city supervisory personnel.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 22, 2020. Valerie Ralph, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Dated: Septembe
R23
By September 30, 2020 the city’s senior management should adopt a stronger emphasis on promoting individual city supervisory employee responsibility to 63 complete required training, including AB 1825 supervisor training, in a timely manner. Recommendations – Sand City
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R3: The recommendation has been implemented. The MCACO is part of Monterey County's Office of Emergency Services and has adopted a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) that already supports contingency planning and public notifications. The MCACO COOP is designed to provide timely direction, control, and coordination to the Monterey County leadership and other critical customers before, during, and after an event or upon notification of a credible threat. The plan was last updated on March 19, 2020. In addition, the MCACO will continue to use its website and Facebook page to notify, guide, and...
R25
Sand City should develop a system to ensure that a full and complete written record of all AB 1825 trainings that it sponsors, regardless of whether delivered via classroom, e-learning, or webinar format, is in place and includes the date of the trainings and the names of attendees. This recommendation should be completed of the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 25, 2020. (ADDED VIA ADDENDA) PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 22<sup>nd</sup> day of Septembe
▶
County of Monterey Response to Human Resources, Building and Maintaining a Productive Workforce, the
September 25, 2020
•
8 pages
• 15 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
15 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The “gap-in-service” nature of this cell tower Use Permit request meant that a facility in some location in this South County area was required to be approved in order to comply with 47 U.S. Code §332. (c)(7)(b)(ii)). 38
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F1. As evidenced by interviews, the current level of vacant health care positions has a direct and negative impact on the County by reducing the County's ability to deliver community disease control and prevention outreach, and to provide adequate Public Health case management activities. This also creates an undue burden on the remaining staff that leads to job burnout. Response
R1
The RMA Services Manager should review and improve the RMA Current Planning division’s work practices for RMA planners and Planning managers. Critical thinking, attention to detail, and higher professional standards must be imbued into the RMA Planning process. When County Code directs higher levels of decision making, RMA Planning should require assigning higher level, more experienced planners and higher-level supervisors to prepare and review those applications. (F3, F7) This review should be...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R1. The "Compensation Philosophy" should be updated to reflect appropriate and comparable counties and cities for each job classification. This update should be completed in six months. When the 2019/20 Civil Grand Jury began our investigations, COVID-19 had not yet become a public health crisis. However, as we conclude our reports, we are tasked to specify a time frame within which to address our recommendations. We have done so, attempting to allow some extra time given the current situation. We ask the County Supervisors, Departments, Cities, and Special Districts responsible for enacting o...
F2
The difference between the Board of Supervisors’ Resolution 15-043 No.7 April 28, 2015 use of the name “Bradley-Parkfield LUAC” and the Monterey County official Website use of the name “South County LUAC” for the same LUAC, created confusion that contributed to an RMA planner’s misunderstanding about the South County LUAC.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F2: Partially Agree The Health Department submits that many of these critical positions are a Continuous Recruitment or Open Until Filled. These positions are difficult to fill due to low number of qualified candidates living or willing to relocate to Monterey County due to cost of living.
R2
The Director of RMA should investigate whether the erroneous description of PLN 180317 alternative site’s conditions, as provided to RMA Planning in support of that application, constituted “false material information,” as the term is used in Monterey County Code 21.70.070 (Revocation). Director RMA should then determine if action in accordance with that code is appropriate or necessary for PLN 180317. (F4) This investigation and determination should be completed no later than 90 days after the ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R2: Disagree The Human Resources Department submits that the Director of Human Resources and assigned staff are the premier subject matter experts in this area. The hiring of a consultant, with the appropriate public sector experience, requires significant financial resources which would be better utilized in creating additional County staffing resources. Considerable staff time must be devoted at the outset to educating the consultant and staff County staff to review and validate the work product. This additional work adds significant time for completion of the studies and diverts County staf...
F3
The RMA Planning draft resolution and briefing for the Application both inaccurately asserted that (1) South County had no LUAC, and (2) that the Application did not need to be sent to the LUAC for review. These errors denied a required hearing and stifled public voice on design and local considerations for a large, visible project.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F3: Partially Agree The Human Resources Department submits that there are insufficient HR staffing levels in some departments. In other departments, HR staffing levels are appropriate.
F4
The Application’s one-sentence dismissal of the alternative site, “Unfortunately, due to the mountainous terrain access and road constraints the proposed site was not physically feasible for the construction of the proposed tower” was incorrect. As a result, a constrained and inappropriate site selection was approved.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F4: Agree The Human Resources Department has conducted an in-depth analysis of recruitment process and identified the inefficiencies. In collaboration with the Information Technology Department, we have created a Recruitment Tracking System (RTS). The RTS is intended to create standardization in the recruitment process, define roles and responsibilities (between the HR Analyst and department management), establish timelines, and provide transparency for services rendered with an overall goal of expediting the recruitment process
R4
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code, to include a set of Design Guidelines that empower planners and decision makers to make land use decisions that comply with federal and state regulations, meet applicant needs, yet can still preserve Monterey County’s character in rural and suburban environments. Design Guidelines should be both developmental standards and criteria for character and aesthetics. The Design Guidelines should be applicable to both wireless communications ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R4: Partially Agree The Human Resources Department submits that individual departments may have various reasons for not filling a vacancy immediately which may impact the length of time between a notice of separation and the opening of a recruitment. The Human Resources Department collaborates with the hiring authorities in departments to open recruitments as quickly as possible. Upon receipt of the request to fill the position, the Human Resources Department generally opens the recruitment within 30 days.
F6
The approved cell tower failed to meet multiple site and design conditions of MCC 21.64.310 including: E.2 (has local citizen input on impact and alternative sites), H.1a (preserve visual character, aesthetic value of parcel and surrounding land), H.1c (not sited to create clutter & negatively affect specific views), H.1d (designed to minimize visual impact), H.1e (screened from any public viewing areas), H.2d (designed to mitigate potentially significant adverse visual impacts), and J.3 (compli...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F6: Agree The recent Countywide Employee Engagement Survey indicated that employees express an interest that supports the need for classroom training. <b>REPORT TITLE:</b> 2019 - 2020 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Final Report – Topic: "Human Resources - Building and Maintaining a Productive Workforce, the Lifeblood of an Organization" Monterey County Board of Supervisors RESPONSE BY: RESPONSE TO: Recommendations
R6
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code 21.70.040.A (Public Notice Required) to include the following provision from California Government Code Section 65091(A)(5)(c): "In addition to the notice required by this section, a local agency may give notice of the hearing in any other manner it deems necessary or desirable." (F5) This revision should be completed no later than 24 months after the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R6. In order to ensure an adequate staffing level for essential County public health workers, the County should begin a process to identify supplemental funding sources to mitigate un-forecast budget shortfalls in federal and state grants, aid, or other direct program funding. This analysis should be completed in 30 days. Response
R8
The RMA Services Manager should revise the RMA land use request application supplemental add-on for wireless communications facilities. The revision should account for the different types of facilities, the current rules for accepting and correcting incomplete applications, and add provisions to identify and track the appropriate shot clock in the application --as an automated ongoing function. (F12) This guidance should be completed and operational no later than 12 months after the publication ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R8: Agree The Human Resources Department submits that a review of Human Resources staffing should be conducted to determine the level of staffing needed to achieve departmental vacancy rate goals which are based on individual department operational needs. Further analysis is required to identify individual department vacancy goals. Legistar File ID No. 20-690 Agenda Item No. 12 <b>Monterey County</b> <b>Board of Supervisors</b> 168 West Alisal Street. 1st Floor Salinas, CA 93901 <b>Board Order</b> 831.755.5066 www.co.monterey.ca.us A motion was made by Supervisor John M. Phillips, seconded by ...
F15
The city’s Office of the City Manager’s AB 1825 compliance records management is inadequate. The combination of a lack of a viable tracking system and a single staff point of contact has made effective tracking and compliance problematic.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F5: Agree The Human Resources Department submits that the County's Compensation Philosophy has been in place since 1989. Recently research analysis undertaken by the Human Resources Department indicates that this potentially impacts the County's ability to recruit and retain qualified and experienced employees in certain classifications.
R15
The city should review its Harassment/Discrimination/Retaliation/Abusive Conduct/Bullying Policy to include the employee training requirements mandated by 2 CCR §11024. This recommendation should be completed no later than 12 months after this report is published.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R5. Each budget cycle should include specific opportunities for department heads to identify and justify specific referral and hiring bonuses for their hard-to-fill positions. This process should begin within six months of the date of this report. Response
R17
By September 30, 2020, Pacific Grove should continue to improve its recordkeeping efforts and fully update its supervisory employee roster worksheet to better track and address potentially late AB 1825 training before it becomes late.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R7: Agree The Human Resources Department submits that further analysis is needed to identify the costs associated to reinstate staff in alignment with the current and future organizational development needs. The Board of Supervisors Budget Committee and Board of Supervisors would be required to approve a budget augmentation to restore this Learning and Organizational Development Division.
R23
By September 30, 2020 the city’s senior management should adopt a stronger emphasis on promoting individual city supervisory employee responsibility to 63 complete required training, including AB 1825 supervisor training, in a timely manner. Recommendations – Sand City
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R3. Budgeted positions should be posted in a timely manner giving priority to posting positions that affect the health and safety of County residents. This posting should occur within 60 days. Response
R25
Sand City should develop a system to ensure that a full and complete written record of all AB 1825 trainings that it sponsors, regardless of whether delivered via classroom, e-learning, or webinar format, is in place and includes the date of the trainings and the names of attendees. This recommendation should be completed of the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 25, 2020 pn, Cler County of Monterey, State of California File ID: 20-690 Agenda Item No.: 12 Joel G. Pablo, peputy
▶
County of Monterey Response to Sexual Harassment Prevention #Training Compliance
September 25, 2020
•
6 pages
• 7 responses
•
Score: +1
(+2, 2, -1)
View Details ▾
7 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
The RMA Services Manager should review and improve the RMA Current Planning division’s work practices for RMA planners and Planning managers. Critical thinking, attention to detail, and higher professional standards must be imbued into the RMA Planning process. When County Code directs higher levels of decision making, RMA Planning should require assigning higher level, more experienced planners and higher-level supervisors to prepare and review those applications. (F3, F7) This review should be...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 1, 2020 Valerie Ralph, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors File ID: 20-673 County of Monterey, State of California Agenda Item No.: 11 Je G. Pablo, Deputy
R25
Sand City should develop a system to ensure that a full and complete written record of all AB 1825 trainings that it sponsors, regardless of whether delivered via classroom, e-learning, or webinar format, is in place and includes the date of the trainings and the names of attendees. This recommendation should be completed of the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 25, 2020. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 1st day of Septembe
R30
The Monterey County Civil Rights Office should review and revise the processes used to manage AB 1825 supervisory employee records to include the following: (1) develop a unified interface for accessing and directly managing all past training; (2) develop a method either with Learning Management Specialists, or centralized with an automated and trackable notice or tickler for AB 1825 training due dates; and (3) increase staffing and authority for personnel responsible for tracking and coordinati...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
R30(3) will not be implemented because it is not warranted at this time. 3) Although increased staffing would certainly facilitate the process, the CRO believes it can maintain accurate AB 1825 records if current staffing levels are not reduced. The CRO will commit to seek increased funding or staffing levels if it is unable to keep accurate records given these new developments. The CRO believes that we can always work towards improving processes and it continually reviews its processes and workflows, including AB 1825 compliance management, for efficiencies and improvements. of the Post of Le...
F44
Monterey County Civil Rights Office (MCCRO) has a strong, professional understanding of all requirements to comply with AB 1825 training in the Monterey County government, and delivers high quality, compliant AB 1825 training to County supervisory employees in both online and classroom/in-person settings.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F44: The respondent agrees with the finding. The Civil Rights Office (CRO) believes a high-quality AB 1825-compliant training is the cornerstone to helping the County respect civil rights, provide equal opportunity for all, and pursue equity in all operations by developing a culture of diversity and inclusion. The CRO is grateful to the Civil Grand Jury for recognizing the effort made in providing the organization with a strong training.
F45
MCCRO’s AB 1825 compliance records management is inadequate. The office (1) lacks a unified interface for accessing or directly managing all past training, and (2) lacks sufficient access to individual personnel records to actively track ongoing AB 1825 training deadlines for current or new supervisors.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F45: The respondent disagrees partially with the finding. Since the Civil Grand Jury investigation, there are new developments. Recently, the CRO, in conjunction with the Information Technology Department (ITD), completed the first load of historical compliance records for current employees. The County now has a unified interface for accessing AB 1825 training compliance records dating back to August 1, 2018, and managing current and future compliance in its learning management system (LMS), Learn. The second historical load is expected in the Fall where records will date back to 2015, longer ...
F46
MCCRO’s AB 1825 compliance records management process is a complex series of push-pull actions—requiring careful, ongoing interaction between the MCCRO and other County departments. Each department has Learning Management Specialists to help make this process work, but the MCCRO itself does not have sufficient staff to keep up with the coordination and planning work of ensuring AB 1825 training requirements are met for supervisors in all departments.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F46: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. The process to keep accurate compliance records is complex. Given the size of the organization and the size of CRO staff, the CRO must rely on departments for tracking support and providing accurate management employee information. For example, while an employee, given their title, might appear as a supervisor to CRO staff, it could be that, in that department, their job classification does not supervise other employees. Conversely, a job classification that does not appear to have supervisor duties might have those duties in certain de...
F47
Monterey County Civil Rights Office leadership and staff displayed a high degree of professionalism and personal commitment to the spirit as well as the letter of the AB 1825 law. All office personnel were forthcoming, honest, and helpful for this investigation. 58
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F47: The respondent agrees with the finding. The CRO appreciates and recognizes the very important task carried out by the Civil Grand Jury. The Office understands that local government has a duty to respond to the people it serves and that, by investigating and providing unbiased findings and recommendations regarding local government operations, the Civil Grand Jury is an essential partner in that mission. CRO staff was also pleased by the high degree of professionalism and personal commitment exhibited by the jurors in carrying out the Civil Grand Jury's mission. 00 A 4 W. REPORT TITLE: 201...
▶
County of Monterey Response to the Monument of a Failed Process: South County Use Permit PLN180317
October 28, 2018
•
14 pages
• 21 responses
•
Score: 0
(+3, 4, -3)
View Details ▾
21 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The “gap-in-service” nature of this cell tower Use Permit request meant that a facility in some location in this South County area was required to be approved in order to comply with 47 U.S. Code §332. (c)(7)(b)(ii)). 38
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
f 1,500-feet of a proposed wireless communication facility (or more if determined necessary by the Chief of Planning) to meet the purpose of public notification in the Farmland, Rural Grazing, Permanent Grazing, Resource Conservation, and Open Space zoning districts. This modification to the County SOP for noticing of wireless facilities will help to ensure that more people who may be affected by these projects will be made aware of them in the future.
R1
The RMA Services Manager should review and improve the RMA Current Planning division’s work practices for RMA planners and Planning managers. Critical thinking, attention to detail, and higher professional standards must be imbued into the RMA Planning process. When County Code directs higher levels of decision making, RMA Planning should require assigning higher level, more experienced planners and higher-level supervisors to prepare and review those applications. (F3, F7) This review should be...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R1: Short Response: The County will be implementing this recommendation with minor modifications in the near future. The suggestion to assign higher level staff to specific projects may not always be practicable given the availability of experienced planners at a given time, and the desire for more junior planners to gain valuable experience. However, there needs to be adequate check and balance to avoid individual errors like this. Additional Discussion: One way to develop professional planners is by doing, and we cannot simply load up more experienced planners. The County is currently recrui...
R2
The Director of RMA should investigate whether the erroneous description of PLN 180317 alternative site’s conditions, as provided to RMA Planning in support of that application, constituted “false material information,” as the term is used in Monterey County Code 21.70.070 (Revocation). Director RMA should then determine if action in accordance with that code is appropriate or necessary for PLN 180317. (F4) This investigation and determination should be completed no later than 90 days after the ...
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2: Short Response: This recommendation has been implemented, and based on the facts of this specific case, the Director of RMA has determined that revocation does not meet the criteria established by County Code. Additional Discussion It appears, based on the facts, that this was not "False Material Information", but rather staff's interpretation of information submitted (right or wrong). Arguably, staff should have requested that additional material was provided; however, the information provided was not falsely presented. Therefore, revocation of the permit does not appear to be warranted i...
F3
The RMA Planning draft resolution and briefing for the Application both inaccurately asserted that (1) South County had no LUAC, and (2) that the Application did not need to be sent to the LUAC for review. These errors denied a required hearing and stifled public voice on design and local considerations for a large, visible project.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F3: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees partially with this finding. The staff report package did inaccurately assert that (1) South County had no LUAC, and (2) that the Application did not need to be sent to the LUAC for review. As such, the public was not afforded an opportunity to voice concerns via the LUAC, which is a valuable part of the land use permit process. This also means that the LUAC members themselves did not have opportunity to provide comments as part of the process, which would have given the decision maker local perspective to consider during the hearing. The ...
F4
The Application’s one-sentence dismissal of the alternative site, “Unfortunately, due to the mountainous terrain access and road constraints the proposed site was not physically feasible for the construction of the proposed tower” was incorrect. As a result, a constrained and inappropriate site selection was approved.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F4: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees partially with this finding. Determination of feasibility for a cell site requires multi-faceted analysis, due to the numerous factors that can affect coverage, including staff's experience from past projects. Additional information was not sought by staff, so there is no way to be certain if the applicant's statement about alternative sites was correct or incorrect. Additional Discussion: Alternative site analysis is not expressly required by County Code, but Section 21.64.310.H.3 does refer to a list of application submittal requirements...
F6
The approved cell tower failed to meet multiple site and design conditions of MCC 21.64.310 including: E.2 (has local citizen input on impact and alternative sites), H.1a (preserve visual character, aesthetic value of parcel and surrounding land), H.1c (not sited to create clutter & negatively affect specific views), H.1d (designed to minimize visual impact), H.1e (screened from any public viewing areas), H.2d (designed to mitigate potentially significant adverse visual impacts), and J.3 (compli...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
F6: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees fully with this finding. Conclusions drawn by the CGJ Report in this finding was based on a portion of language in the code. The Zoning Administrator, as the decision-making authority by Code, held a public hearing and considered the testimony. Based on their independent judgement, the Zoning Administrator determined that the project met the required findings. There was no appeal filed contesting this determination. Additional Discussion: Section 21.64.310.E reflects a finding that defers decision making from the State to local government ...
R6
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code 21.70.040.A (Public Notice Required) to include the following provision from California Government Code Section 65091(A)(5)(c): "In addition to the notice required by this section, a local agency may give notice of the hearing in any other manner it deems necessary or desirable." (F5) This revision should be completed no later than 24 months after the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R6: Short Response: The County has implemented this recommendation with a slight modification since County Code did not need to be amended to accomplish the desired outcome. Additional Discussion: This is a very good suggestion by the CGJ, and fortunately County Code did not require amending to achieve this goal. On July 14, 2020 The Board of Supervisors accepted the Director's Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to require a notification by mail within a distance o
F7
RMA planners were not diligent or accurate in how they determined, validated, and used certain facts, descriptive information, and technical data in the Application. This damaged the credibility of the Application and undermined local trust in the competence and the fairness of RMA Planning.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F7: Short Response: The County agrees with this finding. This incident, which appears to have been an isolated case, was an unfortunate circumstance of protocols not being followed during the review phase of this project. Additional Discussion: Planners are empowered to make initial assessment of LUAC applicability. However, the protocol is for there to be review by the Planning Manager and/or Chief of Planning, especially where there is any question or potential for local controversy. This looks as if it was an isolated incident of staff not following the protocol. County recognizes that the ...
F9
Monterey County wireless communications code (MCC 21.64.310) lacks provisions to permit staff to secure outside experts, at applicant expense, when needed. This code omission limited planner resources and flexibility to overcome the technical challenges with this application. It reduced RMA Planning staff’s ability to process the Application in a thorough, professional manner.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
F9: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees fully with this finding. Although there are no specific provisions with respect to securing outside experts. County code does not prohibit staff from requesting assistance from outside experts, and in some sections actually gives staff the ability to require additional information if it determined to be needed. Additional Discussion: MCC Section 21.64.310 does not have language that requires use of outside experts; however, it also does not preclude use of outside experts where/when needed. There are sections of the code that could be used...
R10
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code 21.64.310 (Wireless Communication Facilities) to include a provision that requires a post- operational RF-EME survey to be conducted by a certified RF engineer selected by the County but at applicant expense, when any wireless communications facility first becomes operational or has its Use Permit renewed. (F8, F9) This revision should be completed no later than 24 months after the publication of this report.
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
R10: Short Response: It is not warranted for the County to implement this recommendation since the Planning standard conditions of approval for wireless facilities already include provisions for obtaining these reports from the applicant. Additional Discussion: Staff agrees that obtaining these post-operational reports for wireless facilities and making them available to the public is important. County practice is for all wireless facility projects processed by the County to include a standard condition of approval which states: "Prior to commencement of use and on an on-going basis, the Owner...
F13
RMA Planning managers displayed a high degree of internal responsiveness in reaction to the August 28, 2019 meeting in South County about the cell tower. Their subsequent actions were not visible to the community, but represented a quiet, positive example of professional and effective responsiveness to the community’s concerns.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F13: Short Response: The County agrees with this finding. Management took this incident seriously and has looked for ways to coach staff based on the lessons learned. Additional Discussion: RMA appreciates CGJ recognition of RMA efforts. We use cases like this to teach planners so we can try to prevent a similar situation from happening in the future. The Board of completed July 22, 2020 and accepted by the Board on July 28, 2020. Recommendations provided in Citygate's report are directed at use of LUACs and building community trust. <b>REPORT TITLE:</b> 2018 - 2019 Monterey County Civil Grand...
F15
The city’s Office of the City Manager’s AB 1825 compliance records management is inadequate. The combination of a lack of a viable tracking system and a single staff point of contact has made effective tracking and compliance problematic.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F5: Short Response: The County agrees with this finding. State Code requires notification by two of three methods (mail, publication, posting), County Code requires notification using all three methods. Notice for this project met the legal requirements. However, cell phone towers are taller than typical projects so the visual impacts can be broader. Subsequently, County updated the policy for noticing public hearings to extend the distribution radius for cell phone tower projects in certain zoning districts. Additional Discussion: As stated in the Finding, public noticing for the Octobe
R15
The city should review its Harassment/Discrimination/Retaliation/Abusive Conduct/Bullying Policy to include the employee training requirements mandated by 2 CCR §11024. This recommendation should be completed no later than 12 months after this report is published.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 5, 2019 as a group for a site visit down to the project site for PLN180317, with the tower in place, to discuss the analysis in the staff report and the findings in the resolution. Multiple periodic trainings have also been conducted with staff at general staff meetings since this project was approved on relevant topics such as site selection, alternative analysis, LUAC procedures, FCC shot clocks, and the overall application review process. Planning managers also stayed in contact with key members of the community after the project approval to answer questions and provide information from t...
R17
By September 30, 2020, Pacific Grove should continue to improve its recordkeeping efforts and fully update its supervisory employee roster worksheet to better track and address potentially late AB 1825 training before it becomes late.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R7: Short Response: The County will be implementing this recommendation in the near future with a minor modification based on recommendations in the Citygate report. Additional Discussion: The Board of Supervisors commissioned a report of the RMA by Citygate Associates, LLC. This report was completed July 22, 2020 and accepted by the Board on July 28, 2020. This recommendation by the CGJ is addressed through recommendations provided in Citygate's report. Citygate has put forward recommendations that will enhance public involvement fort land use decisions, and work towards rebuilding trust with...
F21
A high-ranking official is the only supervisory employee with no record of training for 2017 or 2019 and is assumed to have failed to complete required AB 1825 training.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
f 21.64.310). As a result of these multiple failures, this application did not meet a required finding for Use Permits as listed in MCC 21.74.050.B.1 (will not be...detrimental or injurious to property and improvement in the neighborhood.) and should not have been approved. Response
R21
By June 30, 2021, the city of Salinas should automate the six-month new supervisor training signal for AB 1825 training. The city’s HR Department should develop an automated HR noticing process that informs all newly hired or appointed supervisors of the six-month AB 1825 supervisor training requirement, and signals HR to (automated or manually) enter that training suspense in the New World ERP system.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 21.64.310 into the Monterey County Code (MCC), and is not part of the decision-making process for projects. While it recognizes local governments and citizens are in a better position than the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) of the State of California to recognize impacts, it goes on to defer authority to the local government to regulate the location and design of cell sites. LUACs are a very important part of that process, but were established by the local government to provide input from the local community to the ultimate decision-maker. Section 21.64.301.H MCC includes General Developm...
R22
By June 30, 2022, the city should continue to advance HR integration and automation of training processes and functions. This should include (1) automated notices or “ticklers” to supervisors on AB 1825 training deadlines, (2) integrating online training records with the New World ERP system, and (3) routinely creating global city reports of compliance that can provide HR and senior city leadership with a comprehensive snapshot of AB 1825 training compliance by city supervisory personnel.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 22, 2020. Dated: Septembe
R23
By September 30, 2020 the city’s senior management should adopt a stronger emphasis on promoting individual city supervisory employee responsibility to 63 complete required training, including AB 1825 supervisor training, in a timely manner. Recommendations – Sand City
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R3: Short Response: The County will be implementing this recommendation in the near future. Additional Discussion: Exhibit B of the LUAC Procedures clearly identifies that the Bradley-Parkfield LUAC covers the entire South County planning area (Area Plan). Given past practices by other planners., it is clear that there is not systemic confusion with respect to the naming of the South County LUAC, and the issue of not knowing there was a South County LUAC seems to be an individual occurrence rather than one that is recurring. However, County agrees to amending the LUAC Procedures (Exhibit B) to...
R25
Sand City should develop a system to ensure that a full and complete written record of all AB 1825 trainings that it sponsors, regardless of whether delivered via classroom, e-learning, or webinar format, is in place and includes the date of the trainings and the names of attendees. This recommendation should be completed of the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 25, 2018 hearing in person. Subsequent to approval of this project, and in response to the concerns of the community, County RMA received a referral from District 3 Supervisor to increase the noticing radius for cell towers in the rural areas of the County (Board Referral 2020.07). On July 14, 2020, the Board of Supervisors accepted the Director's Standard Operating Procedure to require a notification by mail within a distance o
F28
The city’s existing AB 1825 recordkeeping system does not facilitate tracking two-calendar year retraining and six-month supervisory employee training.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F8: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees partially with this finding. A project planner failed to understand the policies and regulations related to cell towers and County standards, which contributed to the series of events covered in this report. However, specific expertise in wireless communication facilities is not required or expected of staff. Additional Discussion: Planning does not require being an expert in any area, but does require knowledge and appropriate application of the policies and regulations. As noted in prior responses, the belief is that this stems more from...
R28
Seaside should implement an onboarding system that effectively captures new or promoted employees and requires them to complete AB 1825 training within six 64 months of their hire or promotion. This recommendation should be completed of the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 28, 2018 Zoning Administrator, but the opportunity for participation was less than it would have been if the LUAC had taken place. Additional Discussion: Board of Supervisors Resolution 15-043 establishes procedures for Land Use Advisory Committees (LUACs) in Monterey County. The purpose of a LUAC is to provide a venue for the local community to provide input on proposed projects. LUACs serve to provide the Appropriate Authority comments and recommendations about the local community's perspective on certain types of projects, especially regarding site design and neighborhood character, which...
▶
Monterey Regional Airport Response to Monterey Peninsula Airport District
July 15, 2020
•
4 pages
• 7 responses
•
Score: -1
(+0, 1, -1)
View Details ▾
7 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The “gap-in-service” nature of this cell tower Use Permit request meant that a facility in some location in this South County area was required to be approved in order to comply with 47 U.S. Code §332. (c)(7)(b)(ii)). 38
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F1, sources of funding for the $62 million or more in local share costs have not been identified. As stated in the AMP, these funds are primarily for the construction of the new passenger terminal building. This was concerning to the Civil Grand Jury because the Board has not effectively communicated to the taxpayers that this large funding gap looms, and the taxpayers within MPAD are likely not aware that the solution to the unfunded portion may include additional taxes. Response: Agree in part; Disagree in part. While the MPAD agrees that complete funding sources will need to be identified f...
R1
The RMA Services Manager should review and improve the RMA Current Planning division’s work practices for RMA planners and Planning managers. Critical thinking, attention to detail, and higher professional standards must be imbued into the RMA Planning process. When County Code directs higher levels of decision making, RMA Planning should require assigning higher level, more experienced planners and higher-level supervisors to prepare and review those applications. (F3, F7) This review should be...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R1. Within the scope of the contract recently executed for advice on funding sources for the "Local Share" of the project, a complete re-forecast of enplanements (and resulting PFC and FAA grant money) should be done, so that the total remaining unfunded local share amount is as accurate as possible. (
F2
The difference between the Board of Supervisors’ Resolution 15-043 No.7 April 28, 2015 use of the name “Bradley-Parkfield LUAC” and the Monterey County official Website use of the name “South County LUAC” for the same LUAC, created confusion that contributed to an RMA planner’s misunderstanding about the South County LUAC.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F2). Response: Will be implemented. The findings of the financial analysis will be reported to the Board of Directors and the public at one or more properly noticed public meetings and will be part of the ongoing information that is shared with the Board of Directors and the public. No decisions will be made by the MPAD Board of Directors regarding proceeding with the Airport Terminal Project without a thorough assessment and understanding of all aspects of the associated funding requirements and the sources. That information, as always, will be shared with the Board of Directors and members o...
R2
The Director of RMA should investigate whether the erroneous description of PLN 180317 alternative site’s conditions, as provided to RMA Planning in support of that application, constituted “false material information,” as the term is used in Monterey County Code 21.70.070 (Revocation). Director RMA should then determine if action in accordance with that code is appropriate or necessary for PLN 180317. (F4) This investigation and determination should be completed no later than 90 days after the ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R2. Communicate immediately with the residents of MPAD about the potential implications of the shortfall in grant funding available for the Terminal Building Project. (
F3
The RMA Planning draft resolution and briefing for the Application both inaccurately asserted that (1) South County had no LUAC, and (2) that the Application did not need to be sent to the LUAC for review. These errors denied a required hearing and stifled public voice on design and local considerations for a large, visible project.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
F3. The number of enplanements has been inconsistently reported in MPAD's financial statement package. This is a critical financial metric used to forecast available AIP grant funding available and should be as clear and accurate as possible for the public, especially those who live within the boundaries of the MPAD. Response: Disagree. The manner in which the MPAD reports enplanement numbers in prepared financial packages is consistent with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"), as required during the audit process. It is important to note that there has always been, and will cont...
R4
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code, to include a set of Design Guidelines that empower planners and decision makers to make land use decisions that comply with federal and state regulations, meet applicant needs, yet can still preserve Monterey County’s character in rural and suburban environments. Design Guidelines should be both developmental standards and criteria for character and aesthetics. The Design Guidelines should be applicable to both wireless communications ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R4. Revise the table (or alternatively add a separate table) in the Management Discussion section of future annual financial statements to include strictly revenue-passenger enplanements since that (rather than total enplanements) is the metric used by the FAA in determining available AIP funding and PFCs. (
R23
By September 30, 2020 the city’s senior management should adopt a stronger emphasis on promoting individual city supervisory employee responsibility to 63 complete required training, including AB 1825 supervisor training, in a timely manner. Recommendations – Sand City
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R3. As soon as they become available, share the results of the contracted inquiry into available funding sources for the local share amounts with the taxpayers. (
▶
Supplemental Response by the County of Monterey Response to the Monument of a Failed Process: South
January 31, 2024
•
15 pages
• 28 responses
•
Score: +1
(+5, 5, -4)
View Details ▾
28 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The “gap-in-service” nature of this cell tower Use Permit request meant that a facility in some location in this South County area was required to be approved in order to comply with 47 U.S. Code §332. (c)(7)(b)(ii)). 38
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
f 1,500-feet of a proposed wireless communication facility (or more if determined necessary by the Chief of Planning) to meet the purpose of public notification in the Farmland, Rural Grazing, Permanent Grazing, Resource Conservation, and Open Space zoning districts. This modification to the County SOP for noticing of wireless facilities will help to ensure that more people who may be affected by these projects will be made aware of them in the future.
R1
The RMA Services Manager should review and improve the RMA Current Planning division’s work practices for RMA planners and Planning managers. Critical thinking, attention to detail, and higher professional standards must be imbued into the RMA Planning process. When County Code directs higher levels of decision making, RMA Planning should require assigning higher level, more experienced planners and higher-level supervisors to prepare and review those applications. (F3, F7) This review should be...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R1: Short Response: The County will be implementing this recommendation with minor modifications in the near future. The suggestion to assign higher level staff to specific projects may not always be practicable given the availability of experienced planners at a given time, and the desire for more junior planners to gain valuable experience. However, there needs to be adequate check and balance to avoid individual errors like this. Additional Discussion: One way to develop professional planners is by doing, and we cannot simply load up more experienced planners. The County is currently recrui...
F2
The difference between the Board of Supervisors’ Resolution 15-043 No.7 April 28, 2015 use of the name “Bradley-Parkfield LUAC” and the Monterey County official Website use of the name “South County LUAC” for the same LUAC, created confusion that contributed to an RMA planner’s misunderstanding about the South County LUAC.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F2 – Agree Explanation: It is not difficult to see how confusion might have been introduced by naming two communities in South County rather than the larger geographic area, but this statement is likely a result of testimony from the planner and a response to this finding would require knowledge of the planner’s thoughts. This same confusion has not been an issue for other planners.
R2
The Director of RMA should investigate whether the erroneous description of PLN 180317 alternative site’s conditions, as provided to RMA Planning in support of that application, constituted “false material information,” as the term is used in Monterey County Code 21.70.070 (Revocation). Director RMA should then determine if action in accordance with that code is appropriate or necessary for PLN 180317. (F4) This investigation and determination should be completed no later than 90 days after the ...
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2: 21egaP Short Response: This recommendation has been implemented, and based on the facts of this specific case, the Director of RMA has determined that revocation does not meet the criteria established by County Code. Additional Discussion It appears, based on the facts, that this was not “False Material Information”, but rather staff’s interpretation of information submitted (right or wrong). Arguably, staff should have requested that additional material was provided; however, the information provided was not falsely presented. Therefore, revocation of the permit does not appear to be warr...
F3
The RMA Planning draft resolution and briefing for the Application both inaccurately asserted that (1) South County had no LUAC, and (2) that the Application did not need to be sent to the LUAC for review. These errors denied a required hearing and stifled public voice on design and local considerations for a large, visible project.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F3: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees partially with this finding. The staff report package did inaccurately assert that (1) South County had no LUAC, and (2) that the Application did not need to be sent to the LUAC for review. As such, the public was not afforded an opportunity to voice concerns via the LUAC, which is a valuable part of the land use permit process. This also means that the LUAC members themselves did not have opportunity to provide comments as part of the process, which would have given the decision maker local perspective to consider during the hearing. The ...
F4
The Application’s one-sentence dismissal of the alternative site, “Unfortunately, due to the mountainous terrain access and road constraints the proposed site was not physically feasible for the construction of the proposed tower” was incorrect. As a result, a constrained and inappropriate site selection was approved.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F4: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees partially with this finding. Determination of feasibility for a cell site requires multi-faceted analysis, due to the numerous factors that can affect coverage, including staff’s experience from past projects. Additional information was not sought by staff, so there is no way to be certain if the applicant’s statement about alternative sites was correct or incorrect. Additional Discussion: Alternative site analysis is not expressly required by County Code, but Section 21.64.310.H.3 does refer to a list of application submittal requirements...
R4
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code, to include a set of Design Guidelines that empower planners and decision makers to make land use decisions that comply with federal and state regulations, meet applicant needs, yet can still preserve Monterey County’s character in rural and suburban environments. Design Guidelines should be both developmental standards and criteria for character and aesthetics. The Design Guidelines should be applicable to both wireless communications ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R4. The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code, to include a set of Design Guidelines that empower planners and decision makers to make land use decisions that comply with federal and state regulations, meet applicant needs, yet can still preserve Monterey County’s character in rural and suburban environments. Design Guidelines should be both developmental standards and criteria for character and aesthetics. The Design Guidelines should be applicable to both wireless communications facilities and a wide range of other infrastructure developments. The Design Guidelines should a...
F6
The approved cell tower failed to meet multiple site and design conditions of MCC 21.64.310 including: E.2 (has local citizen input on impact and alternative sites), H.1a (preserve visual character, aesthetic value of parcel and surrounding land), H.1c (not sited to create clutter & negatively affect specific views), H.1d (designed to minimize visual impact), H.1e (screened from any public viewing areas), H.2d (designed to mitigate potentially significant adverse visual impacts), and J.3 (compli...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
F6: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees fully with this finding. Conclusions drawn by the CGJ Report in this finding was based on a portion of language in the code. The Zoning Administrator, as the decision-making authority by Code, held a public hearing and considered the testimony. Based on their independent judgement, the Zoning Administrator determined that the project met the required findings. There was no appeal filed contesting this determination. 8egaP Additional Discussion: Section 21.64.310.E reflects a finding that defers decision making from the State to local gover...
R6
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code 21.70.040.A (Public Notice Required) to include the following provision from California Government Code Section 65091(A)(5)(c): "In addition to the notice required by this section, a local agency may give notice of the hearing in any other manner it deems necessary or desirable." (F5) This revision should be completed no later than 24 months after the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R6: 31egaP Short Response: The County has implemented this recommendation with a slight modification since County Code did not need to be amended to accomplish the desired outcome. Additional Discussion: This is a very good suggestion by the CGJ, and fortunately County Code did not require amending to achieve this goal. On July 14, 2020 The Board of Supervisors accepted the Director’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to require a notification by mail within a distance o
F7
RMA planners were not diligent or accurate in how they determined, validated, and used certain facts, descriptive information, and technical data in the Application. This damaged the credibility of the Application and undermined local trust in the competence and the fairness of RMA Planning.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F7: Short Response: The County agrees with this finding. This incident, which appears to have been an isolated case, was an unfortunate circumstance of protocols not being followed during the review phase of this project. Additional Discussion: Planners are empowered to make initial assessment of LUAC applicability. However, the protocol is for there to be review by the Planning Manager and/or Chief of Planning, especially where there is any question or potential for local controversy. This looks as if it was an isolated incident of staff not following the protocol. County recognizes that the ...
R8
The RMA Services Manager should revise the RMA land use request application supplemental add-on for wireless communications facilities. The revision should account for the different types of facilities, the current rules for accepting and correcting incomplete applications, and add provisions to identify and track the appropriate shot clock in the application --as an automated ongoing function. (F12) This guidance should be completed and operational no later than 12 months after the publication ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R8. The RMA Services Manager should revise the RMA land use request application supplemental add-on for wireless communications facilities. The revision should account for the different types of facilities, the current rules for accepting and correcting incomplete applications, and add provisions to identify and track the appropriate shot clock in the application --as an automated ongoing function. (
F9
Monterey County wireless communications code (MCC 21.64.310) lacks provisions to permit staff to secure outside experts, at applicant expense, when needed. This code omission limited planner resources and flexibility to overcome the technical challenges with this application. It reduced RMA Planning staff’s ability to process the Application in a thorough, professional manner.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
F9: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees fully with this finding. Although there are no specific provisions with respect to securing outside experts. County code does not prohibit staff from requesting assistance from outside experts, and in some sections actually gives staff the ability to require additional information if it determined to be needed. Additional Discussion: 01egaP MCC Section 21.64.310 does not have language that requires use of outside experts; however, it also does not preclude use of outside experts where/when needed. There are sections of the code that could ...
R9
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code 21.64.310 (Wireless Communication Facilities) to include a provision that permits County staff to secure outside experts, at applicant expense, to support technical considerations or issues attendant to processing of wireless communications facilities when required. (F8, F9) This revision should be completed no later than 24 months after the publication of this report. 43
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R9 – Needs further evaluation Explanation: The ability to secure outside expertise will be evaluated as part of the overall updates to the wireless communication facility regulations in the Monterey County Code. Questions about the type of services needed, costs, mechanisms for securing outside services, and how this might impact shot clock timelines all need to be reviewed. This recommendation will be evaluated as part of the wireless communication ordinance updates and creation of Design Guidelines. See Response 4 above.
F10
RMA Planning’s site visit procedures for planners did not adequately account for area and community differences in the County. They also were not formalized. Planner site visits at the time of this application did not require any pre- orientation to highlight area-specific factors. These shortfalls reduced RMA planners’ ability to understand actual conditions, effects, and the significance of the Application on the South County community.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F10. RMA Planning’s site visit procedures for planners did not adequately account for area and community differences in the County. They also were not formalized. Planner site visits at the time of this application did not require any preorientation to highlight area-specific factors. These shortfalls reduced RMA planners’ ability to understand actual conditions, effects, and the significance of the Application on the South County community. Response to
R10
The Board of Supervisors should revise Monterey County Code 21.64.310 (Wireless Communication Facilities) to include a provision that requires a post- operational RF-EME survey to be conducted by a certified RF engineer selected by the County but at applicant expense, when any wireless communications facility first becomes operational or has its Use Permit renewed. (F8, F9) This revision should be completed no later than 24 months after the publication of this report.
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
R10: Short Response: It is not warranted for the County to implement this recommendation since the Planning standard conditions of approval for wireless facilities already include provisions for obtaining these reports from the applicant. 41egaP Additional Discussion: Staff agrees that obtaining these post-operational reports for wireless facilities and making them available to the public is important. County practice is for all wireless facility projects processed by the County to include a standard condition of approval which states: “Prior to commencement of use and on an on-going basis, th...
F11
RMA Planners’ high work volume, plus the complex nature of processing a cell tower application, also were significant contributing factors to the siting and design of the cell tower in a manner unacceptable to the Bryson Hesperia Community. 40
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F11 – Partially Disagree Explanation: High work volume and complexity are inherent aspects of planning for the County of Monterey. This may lead to important details getting missed or overlooked generally, but hundreds of projects are processed annually without incident. The significance of the planner’s workload on this project is likely a minor contributor to the results.
R11
The RMA Services Manager should develop a planners’ training and operations standard operating procedure (SOP) for RMA Current Planning division, supplemental to any County or RMA employee handbook. This SOP should articulate (1) required planner and staff tasks and coordination, (2) required standards of performance, (3) division routines and site visit procedures, (4) planner-specific professional knowledge goals, and (5) note funded and optional planner-specific training and professional deve...
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
R11 – Will be implemented. Explanation: RMA, now HCD, have been implementing City Gate recommendations which include developing Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). SOPs for each step of the permit review process have been drafted. The SOPs are not organized as noted in the CGJ recommendation above, but they do address the underlying reasons for the recommendation. A separate SOP for processing wireless communication facility applications will be prepared before the end of the 2024 calendar year. 5egaP PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED RESPONSES REPORT TITLE: 2018 - 2019 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Fin...
F12
The wireless communications facility supplemental add-on portions to RMA Planning’s land use development application form were out of date. These add- ons lacked essential, contemporary elements to account for current wireless communications facility types, new FCC application handling requirements, FCC shot clocks, and FCC shot clock tracking/ tolling methods. This increased planner confusion and created a lack of information needed to facilitate planner processing of the Application in a thoro...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
F12 – Disagree Explanation: Housing & Community Development (“HCD”, formally under the RMA) does not have supplemental application information for wireless communication facilities that are in use. Some old version of the materials may exist but are not in regular use. This has not hindered the review and processing of any other permits including wireless facilities. Standardized and simple application forms are used for many different types of permit applications with HCD. The information necessary to review a project is generated by the planner using adopted rules and regulations. The planne...
F13
RMA Planning managers displayed a high degree of internal responsiveness in reaction to the August 28, 2019 meeting in South County about the cell tower. Their subsequent actions were not visible to the community, but represented a quiet, positive example of professional and effective responsiveness to the community’s concerns.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F13: Short Response: The County agrees with this finding. Management took this incident seriously and has looked for ways to coach staff based on the lessons learned. Additional Discussion: RMA appreciates CGJ recognition of RMA efforts. We use cases like this to teach planners so we can try to prevent a similar situation from happening in the future. The Board of Supervisors commissioned a report of the RMA by Citygate Associates, LLC. This report was completed July 22, 2020 and accepted by the Board on July 28, 2020. Recommendations provided in Citygate’s report are directed at use of LUACs ...
F15
The city’s Office of the City Manager’s AB 1825 compliance records management is inadequate. The combination of a lack of a viable tracking system and a single staff point of contact has made effective tracking and compliance problematic.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F5: Short Response: The County agrees with this finding. State Code requires notification by two of three methods (mail, publication, posting), County Code requires notification using all three methods. Notice for this project met the legal requirements. However, cell phone towers are taller than typical projects so the visual impacts can be broader. Subsequently, County updated the policy for noticing public hearings to extend the distribution radius for cell phone tower projects in certain zoning districts. Additional Discussion: As stated in the Finding, public noticing for the Octobe
R15
The city should review its Harassment/Discrimination/Retaliation/Abusive Conduct/Bullying Policy to include the employee training requirements mandated by 2 CCR §11024. This recommendation should be completed no later than 12 months after this report is published.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 5, 2019 as a group for a site visit down to the project site for PLN180317, with the tower in place, to discuss the analysis in the staff report and the findings in the resolution. Multiple periodic trainings have also been conducted with staff at general staff meetings since this project was approved on relevant topics such as site selection, alternative analysis, LUAC procedures, FCC shot clocks, and the overall application review process. Planning managers also stayed in contact with key members of the community after the project approval to answer questions and provide information from t...
R17
By September 30, 2020, Pacific Grove should continue to improve its recordkeeping efforts and fully update its supervisory employee roster worksheet to better track and address potentially late AB 1825 training before it becomes late.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R7: Short Response: The County will be implementing this recommendation in the near future with a minor modification based on recommendations in the Citygate report. Additional Discussion: The Board of Supervisors commissioned a report of the RMA by Citygate Associates, LLC. This report was completed July 22, 2020 and accepted by the Board on July 28, 2020. This recommendation by the CGJ is addressed through recommendations provided in Citygate’s report. Citygate has put forward recommendations that will enhance public involvement fort land use decisions, and work towards rebuilding trust with...
F21
A high-ranking official is the only supervisory employee with no record of training for 2017 or 2019 and is assumed to have failed to complete required AB 1825 training.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
f 21.64.310). As a result of these multiple failures, this application did not meet a required finding for Use Permits as listed in MCC 21.74.050.B.1 (will not be…detrimental or injurious to property and improvement in the neighborhood.) and should not have been approved. Response
R21
By June 30, 2021, the city of Salinas should automate the six-month new supervisor training signal for AB 1825 training. The city’s HR Department should develop an automated HR noticing process that informs all newly hired or appointed supervisors of the six-month AB 1825 supervisor training requirement, and signals HR to (automated or manually) enter that training suspense in the New World ERP system.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 21.64.310 into the Monterey County Code (MCC), and is not part of the decision-making process for projects. While it recognizes local governments and citizens are in a better position than the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) of the State of California to recognize impacts, it goes on to defer authority to the local government to regulate the location and design of cell sites. LUACs are a very important part of that process, but were established by the local government to provide input from the local community to the ultimate decision-maker. Section 21.64.301.H MCC includes General Developm...
R23
By September 30, 2020 the city’s senior management should adopt a stronger emphasis on promoting individual city supervisory employee responsibility to 63 complete required training, including AB 1825 supervisor training, in a timely manner. Recommendations – Sand City
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R3: Short Response: The County will be implementing this recommendation in the near future. Additional Discussion: Exhibit B of the LUAC Procedures clearly identifies that the Bradley-Parkfield LUAC covers the entire South County planning area (Area Plan). Given past practices by other planners., it is clear that there is not systemic confusion with respect to the naming of the South County LUAC, and the issue of not knowing there was a South County LUAC seems to be an individual occurrence rather than one that is recurring. However, County agrees to amending the LUAC Procedures (Exhibit B) to...
R25
Sand City should develop a system to ensure that a full and complete written record of all AB 1825 trainings that it sponsors, regardless of whether delivered via classroom, e-learning, or webinar format, is in place and includes the date of the trainings and the names of attendees. This recommendation should be completed of the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 25, 2018 hearing in person. Subsequent to approval of this project, and in response to the concerns of the community, County RMA received a referral from District 3 Supervisor to increase the noticing radius for cell towers in the rural areas of the County (Board Referral 2020.07). On July 14, 2020, the Board of Supervisors accepted the Director’s Standard Operating Procedure to require a notification by mail within a distance o
F28
The city’s existing AB 1825 recordkeeping system does not facilitate tracking two-calendar year retraining and six-month supervisory employee training.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F8: Short Response: Respectfully, the County disagrees partially with this finding. A project planner failed to understand the policies and regulations related to cell towers and County standards, which contributed to the series of events covered in this report. However, specific expertise in wireless communication facilities is not required or expected of staff. Additional Discussion: Planning does not require being an expert in any area, but does require knowledge and appropriate application of the policies and regulations. As noted in prior responses, the belief is that this stems more from...
R28
Seaside should implement an onboarding system that effectively captures new or promoted employees and requires them to complete AB 1825 training within six 64 months of their hire or promotion. This recommendation should be completed of the publication of this report.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 28, 2018 Zoning Administrator, but the opportunity for participation was less than it would have been if the LUAC had taken place. Additional Discussion: Board of Supervisors Resolution 15-043 establishes procedures for Land Use Advisory Committees (LUACs) in Monterey County. The purpose of a LUAC is to provide a venue for the local community to provide input on proposed projects. LUACs serve to provide the Appropriate Authority comments and recommendations about the local community’s perspective on certain types of projects, especially regarding site design and neighborhood character, which...
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Monterey County
County
* 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.