Can the Emergency Operations Center Survive a Catastrophic Event? Can the Emergency Operations Center Survive a

R1

By September 1, 2018, the County should consider assigning responsibility for maintaining the land around the Emergency Operations Center, as well as the road to the facility, to the Orange County Public Works Department, which has staff with expertise in this field. (F1, F3, F4)

R2

By December 1, 2018, the County should have plans in place to repair and widen the current access road, enhance and add turnouts, or add a new access road to provide safe travel to and from the Emergency Operations Center. (F1)

R4

By January 1, 2019, the County of Orange and the Sheriff’s Department should initiate a study regarding the ability to use the Loma Ridge Jeep Trail as an emergency exit route from the Emergency Operations Center. (F2)

R1

By September 1, 2018, the County should consider assigning responsibility for maintaining the land around the Emergency Operations Center, as well as the road to the facility, to the Orange County Public Works Department, which has staff with expertise in this field. (F1, F3, F4)

R3

By December 1, 2018, the County of Orange should have a contract in place to ensure regular weed abatement around the Emergency Operations Center and along Loma Ridge Road. (F3, F4)

R1

By September 1, 2018, the County should consider assigning responsibility for maintaining the land around the Emergency Operations Center, as well as the road to the facility, to the Orange County Public Works Department, which has staff with expertise in this field. (F1, F3, F4)

R3

By December 1, 2018, the County of Orange should have a contract in place to ensure regular weed abatement around the Emergency Operations Center and along Loma Ridge Road. (F3, F4)

R5

By September 1, 2018, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department should ensure that all office furniture and equipment is properly secured to prevent damage or personal injury in a major earthquake. (F5) RESPONSES The following excerpts from the California Penal Code provide the requirements for public agencies to respond to the findings and recommendations of this Grand Jury report: §933(c) “No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head or any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. . . . ” §933.05 “(a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.” Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code §933.05 are required from: Responses Required: