SSSoononnoomommaa aC CCoououunnnttyty y CCCiviivivlii llG GGrraranannddd J JuJuurryry y 22020202121-1-2-2020202222 2f

Conclusions 19

• CL1 Page 23
  The sheer complexity of navigating the bureaucracy in all aspects of a project
• CL2 Page 23
  The high cost of land in Sonoma County
• CL3 Page 23
  The difficulty, complexity, and slow pace of financing a project
• CL4 Page 23
  The shortage and high cost of building materials and supplies
• CL5 Page 23
  The shortage of both skilled and unskilled labor as well as labor costs
• CL6 Page 23
  The complexity and costs of mitigation fees and building permits
• CL7 Page 23
  The inconsistency of costs, procedures, and regulations among the jurisdictions within the County
• CL8 Page 23
  Public opposition and misunderstanding of Affordable Housing and its recipients
• CL9 Page 75
  Implemented a new command structure
• CL10 Page 75
  Tightened up protocols related to vehicle check-out
• CL11 Page 75
  Implemented electronic barcoding of evidence and other seized items
• CL12 Page 75
  Implemented camera surveillance and monitoring of the evidence room
• CL13 Page 75
  Limited access to the evidence room to three designated persons with key access
• CL14 Page 75
  Implemented counting of seized cash on body worn cameras at time of seizure
• CL15 Page 75
  Contracted with an outside firm to investigate citizen complaints of RPDPS officers The Grand Jury has identified areas in which we believe improvement can continue to be made to ensure the continued adherence to established policies and procedures. These
• CL16 Page 41
  Monitoring of compliance with the rules and regulations of Affordable Housing programs is complex. Responsibility lies with individual housing departments in the County and its nine cities. Staffing in these agencies is often insufficient, and there is little coordination amongst these organizations. Monitoring in general and on-site monitoring in particular have long been low priority. Requirements have been largely met by accepting self-reported data from owners and managers of apartment and housing units. The COVID-19 pandemic and the restrictions imposed in response to it placed almost total reliance on self-reported information. Systems that are already overburdened do not appear to be prepared for the large increases in Affordable Housing that are planned for the near future.
• CL17 Page 90
  The SMART District has suffered a number of disruptions in its short life that have put it at risk of losing public confidence and trust, some within and some outside its control. Without decisive and visible steps to bolster public confidence, it could conceivably lose funding such that it never fulfills the vision originally provided to the public. One powerful step toward rebuilding public confidence and trust—with the possible added benefit of gaining a greater brain trust in decision-making—is to give the public a greater insight into the SMART management and a greater voice to decision makers. The SMART tax funding was originally proposed with the Sample Ballot statement that “Independent Citizens' Oversight and annual audits are MANDATORY to ensure funds are spent properly” (emphasis in the original). There are two definitions of oversight: 1) the action of overseeing something; 2) an unintentional failure to notice or do something. In order to fully achieve the independent citizens’ oversight—in the first sense—the SMART BOD must redefine and re-energize the existing COC, and/or must establish additional advisory committees. The BOD, COC, and prominent citizens groups have addressed this, but it has not been implemented; it is past time to do so.
• CL18 Page 99
  Prior to making arrangements for the sharing of existing water resources, the closure of the Sonoma Developmental Center had a negative impact on the water supply in Sonoma Valley. There has been no effort to arrange for the sharing of water resources and there is no longer any access to potable water in the storage facilities at the SDC. The production of the reports required for the Specific Plan has been delayed for one year, as has the final Specific Plan. When the Specific Plan is finalized, the water authorities in Sonoma Valley must meet with the California Department of General Services to determine the new water requirements and the best way to source them without negatively impacting the existing needs of the region.
• CL19 Page 108
  The 2021-2022 Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury concluded that the responses to the 2020-2021 Grand Jury Recommendations comply with the Penal Code. In addition, the Grand Jury has included its observations on the responses following pages titled: 2020-2021 Grand Jury Response Summary Chart. Within the five issued reports, the 2020-2021 Grand Jury made 66 Findings and issued 47 Recommendations requiring a total of 98 responses from 19 different County and City agencies and governing boards. There were also two invited responses and five commendations. Responses sometimes indicate partial implementation of a Recommendation and are sometimes ambiguous; the table below is intended to give a general overview. Roughly two thirds of the Recommendations have been or will be implemented and about one fifth have been rejected. Recommendation Actions In Implemented Further Will Not Be Report Total Implemented Progress In Future Analysis Implemented Rohnert Park Districts 3 2 1 0 0 0 Broadband Access 18 5 0 6 7 0 Jail Telephone and 9 2 0 1 4 2 Commissary COVID Mitigation at 7 1 0 2 1 3 the Jail Emergency 62 32 6 9 2 13 Communications Total 99 42 7 18 14 18 Percent of all 43% 7% 18% 14% 18%

Commendations 1

• CM1 Page 61
  Sonoma County, along with the rest of California, the United States, and the world, faced a pandemic without precedent in the last 100 years. Few governments or agencies were prepared for a health crisis of this magnitude. Public health departments across the country and in Sonoma County were not adequately funded, staffed or conceptually prepared. The legal authority possessed by California public health officers was unknown to most members of the public, and the community’s understanding of the measures necessary to combat a pandemic were at best poorly understood. That said, in many regards, our County rose to the challenge, with rapid allocation of extraordinary resources, enactment of legal measures to reduce spread of disease and expedite response, initiation of extraordinary medical efforts to understand and mitigate the effects of the disease, and the heroic contributions by countless dedicated public and private workers and managers. We want to commend all members of the County, with special thanks to the Department of Health Services, Disaster Service Workers, and Emergency Operations Center for their commitment to the community.

Observations 29

• OB1 Page 128
  Sonoma County Board of Supervisors meetings
• OB2 Page 128
  City Council meetings
• OB3 Page 128
  School Board meetings
• OB4 Page 128
  Police Citizen’s Academy
• OB5 Page 128
  Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach (IOLERO) meetings
• OB6 Page 128
  Sonoma County Behavioral/Mental Health Board meetings or, you can apply to service on governing boards, councils or the Sonoma County Grand Jury. Application forms to become a Sonoma County Civil Grand Juror are available online at www.sonomagrandjury.org or in person at: Sonoma County Superior Court 600 Administration Drive, Room 106 Santa Rosa, California 95403 707-521-6501 Citizens’ Complaints If you have a grievance with processes that fall within the jurisdiction of the Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury, you have the right to file a complaint. All complaints and investigations are confidential. Not all complaints warrant an investigation by the Grand Jury. Citizen Complaint forms are available in both English and Spanish. The forms are available at: www.sonomagrandjury.org. Copies of this report are available at any county library. The reports contained with this consolidated report are also available on line at: www.sonomagrandjury.org Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury Final Report 2021-2022
• OB7 Page 109
  R1. The City of Rohnert CRP This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury Park establish a procedure implemented. Procedures are in place to acknowledges that this to monitor and track ethics arrange and provide training and to monitor Recommendation has been training for publicly elected compliance with AB 1234. implemented. officials as required by California Assembly Bill No. 1234. This should occur by December 31, 2021. R2. The City of Rohnert CRP This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury Park notify elected officials implemented. Notifications of online acknowledges that this of ethics training bi-annual training were sent in November 2020. Recommendation has been deadlines by December 31, implemented. 2021. R3. The City Council CCRP This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury members proactively plan implemented but will be implemented in the acknowledges that this in advance and allocate future. Plans have been established for Recommendation will be time in Council Meeting contracting with demographic and outreach implemented in the future. agendas to give the public consultants. At least four public hearings opportunity for robust and will be scheduled in 2021 in order to give the ongoing discussion of any public opportunities for robust and ongoing changes to the City’s discussion on any changes in the City's demographics that need to demographics that need to be addressed. The be addressed when the new City’s actions will comply with the Fair and Census data is released on Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and September 30, 2021. This Political Subdivisions (Fair Maps) Act. should occur by December 31, 2021.
• OB8 Page 110
  COUNTY JAIL INMATE TELEPHONE AND COMMISSARY Background: As part of its inquiry into the Sonoma County Main Adult Detention Facility’s (MADF) telephone service, the Grand Jury found a pattern of charges for inmate phone use that exceeds the market rate by more than tenfold. The Sheriff’s Office also runs a commissary inside the MADF and its prices are typically 200% to 300% over the jail’s wholesale cost. The Sheriff’s Office deposits the phone commissions and commissary mark-up into the Inmate Welfare Trust (IWT) as State law requires. The Inmate Welfare Trust (IWT) was established to provide inmate programs, and in any given year, the IWT Committee may decide not to spend all of the money it raised. As of early 2021, the IWT held a surplus of over $1.6 million. The Grand Jury offered these Recommendations to provide inmates a more accessible phone system and a more affordable commissary. RES = Respondent; GJ = Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury; BOS = Sonoma County Board of Supervisors; MADF = Main Adult Detention Facility; SCSO = Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office; GTL = Global Tel Link, (MADF telephone provider) 2021-2022 GJ RECOMMENDATIONS RES RESPONSES
• OB9 Page 110
  R1. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury work with the Board of analysis. The SCSO is open to replacing acknowledges that this Supervisors to replace the the commission-based contract, as long as Recommendation requires current commission-based the inmate programs it supports are not further analysis and cannot be audio and video contract sacrificed. The SCSO would look to the implemented until the with Global Tel Link, using BOS to commit General Funds for these analysis is completed. a model based on the San programs so they would not be Francisco County Sheriff’s discontinued. Department, by December BOS This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury 31, 2021. analysis. County staff will research San acknowledges that this Francisco County’s commission-free model Recommendation requires to evaluate feasibility, fiscal impact and further analysis, and that the operational impact. Upon completion of the BOS cannot implement it by analysis, the BOS will look to the Sheriff’s December 31, 2021. The GJ office to determine if the program and recognizes that the BOS will structure should be changed, and then bring direct staff to perform the a recommendation to the BOS as needed. necessary research for the analysis. R2. By September 30, SCSO This Recommendation has been partially The Grand Jury 2021, the Sheriff’s Office implemented and requires further analysis. acknowledges that this develop a new Detention staff is currently in Recommendation requires communications model to communication with GTL for additional further analysis, and that the provide for sufficient telephone kiosks and video visitation at the analysis should be completed telephone kiosks to allow MADF. The SCSO is currently offering by December 2021. The GJ the inmate population free each inmate 70 minutes of free phone calls recognizes that the SCSO has telephone and video per week. Sheriff’s staff has prepared a made changes to improve visitation for at least 90 funding request to the BOS to ensure inmate telephone access by minutes per week until such continued funding, and if provided, will offering 70 minutes of free time as a new work with GTL for more equipment as phone calls per inmate per needed. week.
• OB10 Page 109
  2021-2022 GJ RECOMMENDATIONS RES RESPONSES
• OB11 Page 111
  communication contract is in effect. R3. As required by PC § SCSO This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury 4025(e), the Sheriff’s implemented. The SCSO has been acknowledges that this BOS Office provide an annual providing an annual report to the BOS as Recommendation has been report to the Board of required by PC § 4025(e) since FY 03-04, implemented. Supervisors detailing line and will submit the report for fiscal year item revenue and expenses ending June 30, 2021 by November 30, within the Inmate Welfare 2021. Trust, beginning with the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, with the initial report due by November 30, 2021. R4. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation will not be The Grand Jury use its $1.6 million Inmate implemented. On June 17, 2021, the SCSO acknowledges that this Welfare Trust surplus to returned to normal visiting operations. The Recommendation will not be remove all charges for SCSO also continues to provide each inmate implemented. The GJ also telephone service while in- a free 10-minute phone call per day. recognizes that the SCSO has person visitation is made changes that improve suspended, on or before inmate access to in-person September 30, 2021. visits and phone usage. R5. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury reevaluate its commissary analysis. The SCSO intends to change the acknowledges that this markup to be in line with pricing structure with an updated and Recommendation requires grocery store, as opposed to modernized commissary system based on further analysis and cannot be convenience store pricing, analysis expected to be completed in implemented until the on or before September 1, December 2021. While it is the intent of the analysis is completed in 2021. SCSO to sell hygiene supplies and December 2021. The GJ also stationery products with a 0% mark-up, recognizes the SCSO does snack items will not be priced similar to a not have the ability at the grocery store because the pricing structure MADF to purchase in bulk needs to compensate for the additional costs and store in large quantity to at the MADF (security, small storage area, obtain discount pricing. The delivery, etc.) that are not present in a MADF also incurs more grocery store setting. direct overhead costs than that of a grocery store. R6. By September 30, SCSO This Recommendation has not yet been The Grand Jury 2021, the Sheriff’s Office, implemented, but will be in the future. acknowledges that this using the reserve Inmate Prolonged interactions between inmates Recommendation will be Welfare Trust funds, from different housing areas has been implemented in the future. resume all inmate programs eliminated in order to reduce the spread of The GJ recognizes that the in existence pre-COVID, COVID-19. Detention staff will resume COVID-19 safety precautions with funding at the same pre-pandemic level programming when it is create program challenges in level once COVID related safe to do so. the MADF congregate restrictions are lifted. setting.
• OB12 Page 112
  R7. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation will not be The Grand Jury restructure the 10-member implemented. The Inmate Welfare Trust acknowledges that this Inmate Welfare Trust Committee provides recommendations and Recommendation will not be Committee by December direction to the Sheriff on inmate programs implemented. The GJ also 31, 2021 to include more and IWT expenditures. The SCSO is always recognizes that Penal Code § diverse representation, for open to suggestions from the community. 5006 applies only to state example, community prisons and not the MADF. members, financial analysts, social workers and educators to bring the Committee more in line with the requirements of Penal Code § 5006 regarding commission membership standards for State Prisons.
• OB13 Page 113
  COVID-19 MITIGATION AND THE COUNTY JAIL Background: The Grand Jury investigated activities by the Court, the District Attorney and the Sheriff’s Department to reduce jail populations and lessen the likelihood of a major COVID-19 outbreak within the jail. The Sheriff’s Office made significant efforts to mitigate Covid-19 transmission throughout its detention facilities to ensure the on-going health and safety of inmates and employees. The Grand Jury recognized the success of the Sheriff’s Office in avoiding a major COVID-19 outbreak in the jail. However, some actions significantly limited the ability of inmates to communicate with family and legal representatives. Other actions limited inmates’ access to educational and recreational resources. The Grand Jury made several Recommendations aimed at restoring inmates’ rights and maintaining reduced prison populations. RES = Respondent; GJ = Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury; SCSO = Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office; DA = Sonoma County District Attorney; MADF = Main Adult Detention Facility 2021-2022 GJ RECOMMENDATIONS RES RESPONSES
• OB14 Page 110
  R1. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation has not yet been The Grand Jury develop, no later than implemented but will be implemented in acknowledges that this September 1, 2021, a policy the future. However, the SCSO partially Recommendation will be to restore out of cell disagrees with the Recommendation implemented in the future, activity, in person and video because out of cell activities partly depend with a specific goal of visitation, and all programs on inmate population over which it does implementation of video to pre-pandemic levels. not have final control. It is the goal of the visitation programs by April Sheriff’s Office to have a revised policy 1, 2022. completed by April 1, 2022. R2. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury implement 30-minutes of implemented. As of June 19, 2021, the acknowledges that this video visits per week by Sheriff’s Office has restored in-person Recommendation has been September 30, 2021, and visiting to pre-pandemic levels. implemented through the continue until it fully restoration of in-person visits. restores in-person visits to the pre-pandemic levels. R3. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation will not be The Grand Jury should continue the implemented because it is not warranted or acknowledges this pandemic-era policies reasonable. The SCSO cannot legally Recommendation will not be favoring citations over “favor” citations over arrests. The decision implemented. arrests. of citation vs arrest is the responsibility of the officer in the field. R4. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury and the Board of analysis. The SCSO recognizes the acknowledges that this Supervisors work together substantial role discharge planners play for Recommendation requires to develop a plan by inmates with ongoing mental health and further analysis. A future GJ December 21, 2021 to medical needs. The SCSO will monitor may choose to follow up on increase the contracted case load and issue recommendations to this issue. Wellpath resources to fund the BOS as needed. four additional Wellpath
• OB15 Page 114
  discharge planners for mental health and medical assignments to the Main Adult Detention Facility. R5. The District Attorney DA This Recommendation will not be The Grand Jury discontinue cash bail for implemented because the DA does not acknowledges that this defendants charged with have authority to unilaterally discontinue Recommendation cannot be misdemeanors and non- cash bail. However, the DA acknowledges fully implemented at this violent, non-sexual and less that the practice of issuing citations rather time. serious felonies. than making arrests for misdemeanors and non-violent felonies has helped keep the MADF population from increasing. Further, it involves not only the arrest practices of the SCSO, but that of all law enforcement agencies. R6. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation has not yet been The Grand Jury implement a surveillance- implemented but will be implemented in acknowledges that this testing program and require the future. The California Dept of Public Recommendation will be 100% participation by all Health Services order dated July 26, 2021, implemented. unvaccinated jail staff by requires implementation of the September 1, 2021. Recommendation. The SCSO will be fully compliant with the Order by August 23, 2021. R7. The Sheriff’s Office SCSO This Recommendation will not be The Grand Jury reassign jail staff who implemented because it is not warranted or acknowledges that this decline vaccination or reasonable. This is a Human Resources Recommendation will not be participation in surveillance issue and will be addressed through the implemented. Given the testing by September 1, Sonoma County Human Resources State Public Health Order, 2021. Department. this Recommendation is no longer relevant as vaccination tracking or surveillance testing is now mandatory for State and local correctional facilities and detention centers.
• OB16 Page 115
  BROADBAND ACCESS IN SONOMA COUNTY Background: Access to high quality internet (“Broadband”) is not available throughout all of Sonoma County due to the rugged, rural nature of much of the County, the reluctance of broadband providers to underwrite expansion to underserved areas, and the difficulty many residents have in paying for broadband services. This “digital divide” prevents many individuals from participating fully in our increasingly digital society. The Grand Jury investigated the current state of broadband availability in the County and identified several means through which it could be improved. RES = Respondent; GJ = Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury; BOS = Sonoma County Board of Supervisors; EDB = Economic Development Board; TPW = Department of Transportation and Public Works; PS = Permit Sonoma; COA = Sonoma County Office of Administration; ASB = Access Sonoma Broadband 2021-2022 GJ RECOMMENDATIONS RES RESPONSES
• OB17 Page 115
  R1. The Sonoma County BOS This is interpreted as a two-part The Grand Jury recognizes that Board of Supervisors Recommendation: (1) The Sonoma County BOS has interpreted this consider recognizing and Board of Supervisors consider recognizing Recommendation as having designating broadband as a and designating broadband as a "Utility; two parts. The GJ “Utility” that needs (2) Broadband needs prioritization. acknowledges that Part 1 prioritization by October requires further analysis and Part 1 of this Recommendation requires 31, 2021. that designation as a “utility” is further analysis. The Economic dependent on determination of Development Board is beginning a governance structure that is assessment of a governance structure that yet to be determined. would best support broadband infrastructure development and The GJ acknowledges that Part maintenance. This assessment will also 2 of this Recommendation has include analysis of options regarding the been partially implemented County's role with the Office of Broadband through inclusion in the Five- and Digital Literacy and the State's new Year Specific Plan. Office of Broadband. Part 2 of this Recommendation has been implemented. On March 2, 2021, the BOS approved a Five-Year Strategic Plan that includes specific objectives related to broadband deployment and access. R2. The Sonoma County BOS This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges Board of Supervisors adopt implemented. On June 8, 2021, the Board that this Recommendation has and support a plan to of Supervisors approved the Broadband been implemented. address a lack of broadband Action Plan and allocated $315,000 to fund access in the County by the initial phase of the Action Plan. November 30, 2021. R3. The Sonoma County BOS This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges Board of Supervisors implemented. The EDB has initiated the that this Recommendation has provide staff and funding to Broadband Speed Test Initiative, which been implemented. The GJ allow the Economic allows community members to test their also notes that speed tests do
• OB18 Page 116
  Development Board and current home internet speeds. When all not address a lack of service Access Sonoma Broadband tests are complete, the EDB will analyze due to unavailability or cost. to develop accurate data on the data, and may request funding from the broadband service for the Board of Supervisors if additional study is County by December 31, needed. 2021. R4. The Sonoma County BOS This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges Board of Supervisors and implemented but will be implemented in that this Recommendation has Economic Development the future. The Board of Supervisors is not been implemented but will Board assemble an awaiting a set of recommendations from be implemented in the future. interdepartmental group to EDB concerning the governing structure coordinate and oversee needed to implement their Broadband efforts in Broadband Action plan. expansion by November 30, EDB This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges 2021. implemented but will be implemented in that this Recommendation has the future. An RFP for consulting services not been implemented but it related to Broadband expansion is will be implemented in the currently in development, with a release future. planned for late July 2021. The scope includes comprehensive research of potential governing structures and the creation of a business plan for the recommended structure. It is anticipated that a contract will be awarded in September 2021, with a governance structure and partnerships identified in late 2021. R5. The Sonoma County BOS This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges Board of Supervisors and implemented. In 2016, the County of that the Recommendation has the Economic Development Sonoma entered into a Joint Powers been implemented by means of Board consider the Agreement with Marin County, Napa the NBNCBC, and that a establishment of a County and Mendocino County to potentially more powerful JPA broadband Joint Powers coordinate efforts to improve broadband is under consideration (see Agreement that includes access for rural communities. Through the EDB response below). Sonoma County, North Bay North Coast Broadband Mendocino County, and Consortium (NBNCBC) the four counties possibly other neighboring have worked to identify broadband counties by November 30, deployment opportunities, locate 2021. broadband funding sources, complete broadband strategic plans and help broadband service providers take advantage of funding to address broadband opportunities. The NBNCBC has also worked to recommend the member counties authorize coordination with local, state and federal officials to review and support regulations and policies to further
• OB19 Page 117
  expand broadband deployment to rural areas. EDB This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury recognizes implemented but will be implemented in that this Recommendation will the future. A Joint Powers Agreement be implemented in the future. (JPA) is one of the structures recommended by the Broadband Action Plan, and will be considered as part of the scope of work outlined in the response to R4. The County will consider if a regional model is an appropriate tool for deploying broadband infrastructure in Sonoma County. R6. The Sonoma County BOS This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges Board of Supervisors give a implemented. The County has given high that this Recommendation has high priority to addressing priority to accomplishing the Broadband been implemented. However, personnel levels sufficient Action Plan and has allocated $315,000 for the GJ notes that the allocation to accomplish the goals of a the initial stages of this work (consulting addresses the initial phase of broadband specific plan. service, legal services, and grant this work and does not directly management). address personnel levels. R7. The Sonoma County TPW This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges Department of implemented but will be implemented in that this Recommendation has PS Transportation, Permit the future. By December 31, 2021, TPW not been implemented but will Sonoma and Access will begin working with Permit Sonoma to be implemented in the future. Sonoma Broadband start the development of formal public develop procedures and right-of-way construction standards that standards that would ensure will facilitate the permitting and placement of broadband installation of broadband facilities. conduit in all appropriate ASB This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury acknowledges situations by December 31, analysis. It is unlikely that ASB will exist that this Recommendation 2021. at an operational capacity sufficient to requires further analysis on the create and recommend policy before a part of ASB. governance structure is identified and created (see R4 above). R8. In the annual budget BOS This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury acknowledges process the Sonoma County analysis. The next opportunity to allocate that this Recommendation Board of Supervisors and funding, during the annual budget process, requires further analysis and the Office of will take place in June, 2022. that the County budget is set Administration include on an annual basis. BOS will evaluation of the costs of not be able to consider laying cable or empty cable/conduit fund allocation conduit in upcoming until June 2022.
• OB20 Page 118
  infrastructure projects by COA This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury acknowledges December 31, 2021. analysis. The County Administrator's that this Recommendation Office will work with departments to requires further analysis. determine if funding is available for "laying cable or empty conduit in upcoming infrastructure projects" and will make appropriate recommendations to the Board of Supervisors through the normal budget hearing process. R9. The Sonoma County BOS This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury acknowledges Board of Supervisors, the analysis. Though download/upload speeds that this Recommendation EDB Economic Development of 100/20 have been recommended by the requires further analysis and ASB Board, and Access Sonoma state as well as identified by NBNCBC as that implementation depends Broadband include in the a target, it is unlikely that formal adoption on establishment of a working implementation of any of any particular speed recommendation plan. broadband plan a clear will be made locally before a governing requirement for the structure and business plan are identified download and upload and created. It is anticipated that an update speeds of 100/20 proposed on this work would be made to the BOS in State of California within six months. Executive Order N-73-20 to be the minimal acceptable level of service by September 30, 2021. R10. The Sonoma County BOS This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury acknowledges Board of Supervisors assure analysis. Though fiber optic cable or its that this Recommendation that any plan for broadband equivalent is a widely used benchmark, it requires further analysis and expansion should utilize is unlikely that the County will adopt depends on adoption of a plan. fiber optic cable formal transmission standards before a transmission or its governing structure and business plan are equivalent whenever it is identified and created. possible by November 30, 2021.
• OB21 Page 119
  EMERGENCY ALERTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Background: Wildfires and other emergency situations have threatened Sonoma County and its residents for many of the last several years. There have been losses of lives, property, and a sense of security. This Grand Jury Report centered on emergency communications. Information must be precise, accurate and continuously updated. The Jury found that significant improvements in communication policies, procedures, and practices have been made since the Tubbs fire in 2017. The Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office and the Department of Emergency Management (DEM) have worked in conjunction with the nine cities of the county to ensure that all residents have access to good information. The Jury also noted four specific areas in which improvement was still needed. In addition, the Jury included a comprehensive listing of available resources for information, both before and in case of an emergency. This information is on pages 83-87 of the full report, which is available at any County library and online at www.sonomagrandjury.org. RES = Respondent; GJ = Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury; SCSO = Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office; DEM = Department of Emergency Management; CCL = City of Cloverdale; CC = City of Cotati; CH = City of Healdsburg; CP = City of Petaluma; CRP = City of Rohnert Park; CSR = City of Santa Rosa; CS = City of Sebastopol; CSO = City of Sonoma; TW = Town of Windsor; BOS = Sonoma County Board of Supervisors; SCFCA = Sonoma County Fire Chief’s Association 2021-2022 GJ RECOMMENDATIONS RES RESPONSES
• OB22 Page 119
  ALERTS AND WARNINGS R1. By October 31, 2021, SCSO The Recommendation will not be The Grand Jury acknowledges the Sheriff’s office, Dept. of implemented. The Sonoma County that this Recommendation will CSO Emergency Management Sheriff’s Office is not responsible for the not be implemented. The GJ and nine cities’ departments county’s EOPs nor does it control the notes that the Sheriff’s Office include within their county’s disaster alert and warning does post alerts on Nixle. Emergency Operations program. Plans action steps to reach DEM The Recommendation may not be The Grand Jury acknowledges all subpopulations within implemented as it is vague. The County’s that this Recommendation may the County who may not Alert and Warning Annex is responsible not be implemented. otherwise receive an alert. for these requirements. CCL This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges implemented. that this Recommendation has SR been implemented. CS CC This Recommendation is being The Grand Jury acknowledges implemented. The EOP will be updated by that this Recommendation is CP October 31, 2021. being implemented. CRP CH TW This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges implemented. Emergency alert services that that this Recommendation are provided by the SoCo Sheriff’s Office
• OB23 Page 120
  and the SoCo Fire District which use Nixle will be part of Town of and social media platforms to alert Windsor updated EOP in 2022. residents of emergencies. Windsor’s EOP will be updated in 2022. R2. By October 31, 2021, BOS This Recommendation has not and may not The Grand Jury acknowledges the Board of Supervisors be implemented. The County has that this Recommendation has review and propose developed robust systems to reach most not been implemented. The GJ additional alert and warning residents, as demonstrated in recent also recognizes that BOS and methods such as air raid disasters. In cases of broadband DES continue to explore sirens and public address unavailability it has used National Weather additional ways to improve and systems to put Radio to target challenging areas and expand warning systems. contingencies in place when populations, and has provided more than broadband fails or is not 10,000 weather radios. Hi-Lo sirens have available. been mounted on vehicles, and DEM continues to explore siren networks and other technologies. R3. By October 31, 2021, DEM This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges the Department of implemented but will be implemented in that this Recommendation will Emergency Management the future. Emergency communications be implemented in the future. explain the challenges are addressed with residents at every event. behind the emergency communications in order that residents may understand, trust and appreciate the complexity and the ongoing work it takes to maintain effectiveness. EVACUATIONS R4. By October 8, 2021, SCSO This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges the Sheriff’s Office, implemented. The evacuation map has that this Recommendation has DEM Department of Emergency been shared with all nine cities, the DEM been implemented. CC Management, and nine and every law enforcement agency and fire cities work together to CCL agency within Sonoma County. ensure consistent naming CH for all evacuation maps CP used by the public and first responders. CRP CS CSO CSR TW
• OB24 Page 121
  R5. By October 8, 2021, SCSO This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges the Sheriff’s Office, implemented. Since late 2020 the Sheriff’s that this Recommendation has DEM Department of Emergency Office worked with all nine cities to create been implemented. CC Management, and nine a unified evacuation mapping system. This cities work together to CCL County-wide evacuation map of the ensure the public is unincorporated areas along with all nine CH informed of their cities was posted on the websites of the CP evacuation zones by Sheriff’s Office and the Department of publishing evacuation maps CRP Emergency Management on May 24, 2021. in local media, online, and CS through SoCo Emergency. CSO CSR TW 2021-2022 GJ RECOMMENDATION RES RESPONSES
• OB25 Page 121
  INFRASTRUCTURE R6. By December 31, SCSO The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges 2021, the Sheriff’s Office implemented. The SCSO that this Recommendation has develop a plan and identify Telecommunications Bureau continually been implemented. what is needed to bring the monitors and analyzes existing equipment communication tower and systems. Critical items are submitted equipment/repeaters up-to- annually to BOS for funding. A current date to ensure during an list of projects is in the FY 2021-2026 emergency the systems Capital Improvement Plan. function (legacy and end of life systems.) R7. By March 31, 2022, SCSO The Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges the Sheriff’s Office and implemented but will be implemented in that implementation of this Board of Supervisors the future. SCSO submits requests on Recommendation depends on provide funding to maintain behalf of the Telecommunications Bureau budget decisions made each the communication tower through the County’s Capital Improvement spring by BOS. equipment/repeaters. Plan. Funding is part of the annual spring budgeting process. BOS This Recommendation requires further The Grand Jury acknowledges analysis. The next opportunity to allocate that this Recommendation funding will be through the annual requires further analysis and budgeting process in June, 2022. The cannot be implemented until Administration will work with departments budget decisions are made. to determine if projects are warranted and funding is available.
• OB26 Page 121
  2021-2022 GJ RECOMMENDATION RES RESPONSES
• OB27 Page 122
  R8. By June 30, 2022, the SCSO This Recommendation has not yet been The Grand Jury acknowledges Sheriff’s Office implement implemented but will be implemented in that this Recommendation will the plan to bring the the future. Actions will depend on the be implemented in the future as communication tower assessment of needs (R7) and BOS funding budgeting decisions are made equipment/repeaters up-to- of projects in the 2021-2026 Capital by BOS each spring. date. Improvement Plan. R9. By December 31, DEM This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury recognizes that 2021, the Department of implemented and may not be implemented. implementation of this PS Emergency Management Commercial broadband providers are not Recommendation relies on the work with Permit Sonoma required to share infrastructure location cooperation of commercial to identify where all cellular and do not do so as it is considered cellular providers which may provider towers are in the proprietary information. Some locations not be forthcoming. The GJ county. are known, but this is not considered accepts that DEM also necessary for optimal use of alert warning considers this location systems. information is not needed for use of the emergency alert system R10. By October 31, 2021 SCSO This Recommendation will not be The Grand Jury accepts that the Sheriff’s Office and implemented because it is not warranted or SCSO and DEM cannot assume DEM Department of Emergency reasonable. The County cannot assume responsibility for sites that are Management work with the responsibility for vegetation management not under County control. Fire Agencies in the county on sites it does not own or control. However, the GJ encourages work to ensure that county agencies to support defensible space standards efforts to maintain defensible (as outlined by CAL FIRE) space standards for all are met for all county infrastructure that is involved in communication emergency alert systems. towers/repeaters and SCFCA SCFCA supports and concurs with this The Grand Jury acknowledges cellular provider network Recommendation. that SCFCA supports this towers. Recommendation. R11. By September 30, SCSO This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges 2021, The Sheriff’s Office implemented. SCSO and DEM coordinate that this Recommendation has DEM and Department of with CALFIRE and local agencies to been implemented. Emergency Management protect local infrastructure. An example is work with the Fire protection of the Mt. Jackson site during Agencies in the County to the LNU Complex fire in 2020. define actions to take during a disaster for the SCFCA SCFCA supports and concurs with this The Grand Jury acknowledges Recommendation. that SCFCA supports this protection of all County Recommendation. communication towers/repeaters and cellular network towers. R12. By December 31, DEM This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury accepts that 2021, the Department of implemented and may not be implemented. DEM does not set safety Emergency Management DEM does not establish infrastructure requirements for commercial
• OB28 Page 123
  work with cellular tower safety requirements for cellular providers, cellular providers’ providers to ensure a plan is but as partners in public safety will support infrastructure. The Jury developed to ensure their efforts. encourages DEM to facilitate defensible space standards measures that support the spirit are implemented around of this Recommendation. each tower. R13. By October 31, 2021, DEM This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges the Department of implemented but will be implemented in that this Recommendation will Emergency Management the future. A new County Emergency be implemented by the end of update the County Management Plan is expected to be 2021, and that After Action Emergency Operations Plan submitted for review and approval by BOS Reports and Recommendations to incorporate and post on in the 4th quarter of 2021. After Action will be posted. the Department of Reports will continue to be posted on the Emergency Management DEM website. website the most up-to-date information and Recommendations from the After Action Reports since the disasters of 2017. R14. By October 31, 2021, BOS This Recommendation is in the process of The Grand Jury acknowledges the Board of Supervisors being implemented. An updated plan is that this Recommendation will approve the updated County being prepared and is expected to be be implemented early in 2022. Emergency Operations submitted to BOS in the first quarter of Plan. 2022. Completion has been delayed by the need to comply with the County’s new strategic plan and a new State law dealing with community engagement and cultural considerations. R15. By October 31, 2021, CC This Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges the nine cities update their implemented, although the Emergency that this Recommendation has CCL Emergency Operations Plan Operations Plan is a long-term planning been implemented. CH to incorporate the most up- document and is not necessarily an to-date information and CS appropriate site for most up to date lessons learned since the information. disasters of 2017 and post it CSO This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges on their websites. implemented but it will be in the future. that this Recommendation will CSR Updating is a continuing process, and the be implemented in the future. CRP Emergency Operating Plan is not CP necessarily an appropriate site for the most up to date information. TW This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges Implemented and may not be implemented that this Recommendation may because the Emergency Operation Plan is not be implemented. not an appropriate site for detailed information.
• OB29 Page 124
  R16. By September 30, DEM This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges 2021, Department of implemented and may not be implemented. that this Recommendation has Emergency Management The Emergency Operations Plan for Warm not been implemented because obtain from the US Army Springs Dam is available to County the Emergency Operations Plan Corps of Engineers a copy officials but subject to a non-disclosure is subject to a non-disclosure of the Emergency agreement. The Army Corps of Engineers agreement. Operations Plan for Warm must balance security concerns and public Springs Dam and safety with release of information. incorporate it into the County Emergency Operations Plan and post it on the Department of Emergency Management website. R17. By December 31, DEM This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges 2021, Department of implemented and may not be implemented. that this Recommendation will Emergency Management, The County submits reports as part of the not be implemented because the through the San Francisco SF Bay Area Local Emergency appropriate Bay Area and State Bay Area Counties, submit Communications Committee which has not organizations are currently non- its annual Emergency Alert met since 2010; this local committee is functional. These organizations System Plan to the State controlled by the State Emergency are expected to be reconstituted. Emergency Alert System Communications Committee which has not Committee of California as met since 2011 but is being reconstituted recommended within the and will hold annual meetings. 2019 State of California Alert and Warnings Guidelines. R18. By December 31, BOS This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges 2021, the Board of implemented and may not be implemented. that this Recommendation has Supervisors adopt a These plans are multiple and complex and not been implemented and may resolution that all major it is impractical to review and update them not be implemented because County disaster plans annually. Plans will be updated on a three annual updating is impractical. having to do with year or as needed basis. Emergencies and Emergency Preparedness be considered “Living Documents” to be reviewed and updated on an annual basis. R19. By December 31, DEM This Recommendation has not been The Grand Jury acknowledges 2021, the Department of implemented but it will be implemented in that this Recommendation will Emergency Management the future. DEM supports multiple be implemented in the future publicize the work of community preparedness groups and will and that support of community community preparedness continue to do so. DEM has applied for a preparedness groups is an groups such as Citizens grant to support these efforts. ongoing process. Organized to Prepare for Emergencies, Community

No Responses Found 10

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.