Final Consolidated Grand Jury Report 2019-2020

Conclusions 20

• CL1 Page 14
  The process followed by County officials did not conform to the MTC public participation policy for project selection (MTC Resolution No. 4035). Thirty-five percent of the SSP affected area was effectively excluded from participation. The Grand Jury, after extensive research, could not find a single reference in published press releases or newspaper articles prior to February 2017 to the Donald Street neighborhood’s inclusion. It is unclear why Permit Sonoma waited five years after the 2012 approval of the SSP to make the first public disclosure that Donald Street was part of the Plan, which occurred in a Permit Sonoma press release dated February 24, 2017. The Grand Jury assumes and hopes that this was due only to an oversight and not to any conscious intent.
• CL2 Page 23
  Since the Grand Jury investigation six years ago, the Sonoma County Sheriff-Coroner’s Office has made significant improvements. They eliminated the case backlog, implemented a new case management system and retained a full time pathologist. The Grand Jury investigation this year found that the department has made organizational changes and is now operating efficiently and professionally. The biggest challenge the Coroner’s Office faces today is the state of their facility. For 31 years, the Coroner’s Office has worked from an antiquated building that has served the County’s needs. As the timing of the Chanate property sale cannot be predicted, the Board of Supervisors should immediately begin the process of relocating the Coroner’s Office or building a new and modern facility.
• CL3 Page 57
  Over the past eight months, our research into Sonoma County homelessness has exposed an insufficient sense of urgency when it comes to providing adequate temporary and permanent housing for the homeless community. Safe, temporary housing options for the homeless are largely unavailable while they wait for permanent housing. Santa Rosa owns a shelter in Sonoma County called the Samuel L. Jones Shelter, but the barracks style accommodations are not appropriate for everyone. Even though there are other shelters in Sonoma County, a significant portion of the homeless population feel they have no viable option but to live on the street or public property while waiting. Sonoma County has a robust network of private, public, and community/religious based organizations that are dedicated to improving the lives of the homeless, but temporary shelter options remain critically limited. There is a strong need for leadership in the county to address the homelessness crisis. On paper the Leadership Council is described as a high-level policy making body. It played no role in developing policies or procedures to address the JRT problem. The County Board of Supervisors (BOS) did take action to resolve this crisis, but did not include the Leadership Council in its efforts. When the BOS did act, it did so in a reactive, rather than a proactive way. Prior to the JRT emergency, the BOS had no plan in place for addressing encampment emergencies, or the shelter and service needs of the homeless population in Sonoma County as a whole.
• CL4 Page 68
  The need for potable water affects everyone in Sonoma Valley, and becomes critical during emergency conditions arising from fire, earthquake, drought or flood. Responses to emergencies and other needs often depend on close cooperation. As conditions change and we need better ways to manage water, we must look for solutions through coordinated planning and operations. This concern inspired the Grand Jury to conduct an additional investigation and issue a companion report, Sonoma Valley Regional Water Resources. The burden of dealing with reductions in its emergency water resources rests heavily on the Valley of the Moon Water District. The VOMWD is also the presumed water supplier for a new Eldridge (the former SDC) within its service area. This presents the VOMWD with planning challenges that involve costs, uncertain liabilities and investments. It is important that the VOMWD participate in the SDC Specific Plan process, and remain flexible in anticipating the future. It is incumbent on neighboring water entities to cooperate with the VOMWD as it seeks and implements solutions. While the City of Sonoma’s emergency water supply plans were not immediately affected by the SDC closure, it too would benefit from access to the surface water supply at SDC in the event of an emergency that compromises the Sonoma Aqueduct or the City’s well supply.
• CL5 Page 82
  Sonoma Valley will need to adopt a more regional approach to water management because of ongoing challenges such as population growth and climate change in the region. Water resources in the Valley are clearly limited; formalized agreements and efforts to share water supplies in an emergency should be equally valuable. Mutual aid agreements can also be applied to supplies, equipment and staffing. Cooperative efforts can extend to joint projects such as water conservation, groundwater recharge and distribution of reclaimed water, all of which are regional concerns. Sonoma Valley has had some notable successes in cooperating on water management such as the Sonoma Aqueduct, the Sonoma Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency and the Regional Water Supply Resiliency Study. Now they are going to need to go beyond that due to future challenges. The need for potable water affects everyone in Sonoma Valley, especially during emergency conditions such as fire, earthquake, drought or flood. As conditions change and we need better ways to manage water, we must seek solutions through cooperation. To anticipate and prepare for tomorrow’s problems, Sonoma Valley needs a regional approach to managing regional water resources.
• CL6 Page 86
  The Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury concluded that the responses to the 2018-2019 Grand Jury Recommendations are in compliance with the Penal Code, except as noted in the summary of responses set out in Appendix A. In addition, the 2019-2020 Grand Jury has included its observations on the responses. To read the full responses and the 2018-2019 Grand Jury report, go to http://sonoma.courts.ca.gov/ and navigate to “Civil Grand Jury.”
• CL7 Page 87
  2018-2019 GRAND JURY RESPONSE SUMMARY CHART WILL THERE BE WATER AFTER AN EARTHQUAKE? RES = Respondent SW = Sonoma Water WC = Water Contractor RECOMMENDATIONS RES. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R1. SW review and establish SW The Recommendation will be The Grand Jury acknowledges that viable options for accelerating how implemented by June 30, 2020. SW intends to implement the rapidly the highest-priority Additional time beyond Recommendation as soon as is mitigation measures are being December 31, 2019 is required practical given budget cycles. funded and implemented by based on the annual schedule December 31, 2019 for the water transmission budget. R2. SW maintain inventory lists SW The Recommendation will be The Grand Jury acknowledges that with current goals for items, implemented. SW intends to implement this quantities, locations, and sourcing; Recommendation. and improve stockpiling accordingly by December 31, 2019 R3. SW and WCs derive and SW The Recommendation will be The Grand Jury acknowledges that publicize more realistic outage implemented. SW intends to implement this periods and provide updated Recommendation. information to the public by December 31, 2019 R4. SW improve coordination with SW SW will draft an emergency The Grand Jury acknowledges that WCs, including field exercises by training and coordination plan, SW intends to create a draft plan to December 31, 2019 in partnership with WCs, by implement this Recommendation December 31, 2019. by the date recommended. The Grand Jury encourages SW to conduct the planned field exercises as soon as practical. R5. WCs study options for making WCs All WCs have been studying The Grand Jury acknowledges that local systems more adaptable under ways to make their systems the WCs are engaged in ongoing emergency conditions – such as more adaptable under studies of system adaptability under dedicated supply loops, digitally emergency conditions, and have emergency conditions, and are monitored metering, or automatic already implemented many of already implementing some of the shut-down valves, by December 31, the options. By spring 2020 options they have identified. 2019 they will complete a further study with SW that will explore enhanced resiliency measures.
• CL8 Page 87
  RECOMMENDATIONS RES. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS (R5. continued) Valley of the Moon Water The Grand Jury acknowledges that District (VOMWD) had an the VOMWD’s plan for emergency emergency supply plan that water supply has been impacted by included connecting to the the early closure of the SDC water stand-alone water system at the treatment plant, and that the SDC (Sonoma Developmental VOMWD’s own wells and storage Center). The State of California are insufficient to sustain a major closed its SDC water treatment outage. The Grand Jury recognizes plant in 2019, earlier than that the VOMWD has been expected, leaving the VOMWD working on long-term plans for with only a one-day supply of expansion of their well capacity. emergency drinking and fire Consistent with the Grand Jury’s control water. original Recommendation, the VOMWD should, with all due haste, study ways to accelerate their development timeline while continuing to look for alternative sources of emergency water supply. R6. SW prepare and maintain one SW The Recommendation will be The Grand Jury acknowledges that or more Standard Operating implemented by June 30, 2020. SW intends to implement this Procedures (SOPs) for the Extra time beyond December Recommendation by the earliest restoration of water deliveries 31, 2019 needed to ensure date practical given the need to specifically for an earthquake; adequate coordination with coordinate with WCs and other SOPs should be updated annually WCs and other external entities. outside entities. or whenever there are changes to procedures by December 31, 2019
• CL9 Page 89
  THE JAILHOUSE ROCKS MADF = Main Adult Detention Facility RECOMMENDATIONS RES. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R1. MADF add nurse hours to the Sheriff The Recommendation requires The Grand Jury encourages the booking area during evening and further analysis. Wellpath is Sheriff to expedite implementation night shifts by December 31, 2019. conducting a booking area of appropriate changes resulting workload analysis to assess the from the workload analysis. effectiveness of current staffing, for discussion by the Sheriff and Assistant Sheriff, by December 31, 2019. A new funding source would be needed to add staffing to the current inmate medical contract. R2. MADF screen all inmates for Sheriff The Recommendation will not The Grand Jury accepts the syphilis at intake by December 31, be implemented. Staffing Sheriff’s proposed compromise as a 2019. levels and funding for reasonable alternative to the screening are insufficient to Recommendation and encourages implement the the Sheriff to initiate a partnership Recommendation. Additionally, with Public Health. many arrestees are released within hours, making results, treatment, and counseling by MADF staff impossible. The Sheriff’s Office is open to partnering with Public Health to combat the syphilis epidemic. If test kits were provided as needed, inmates already housed at MADF and who consent can be tested at the time of their 10-14 day physicals, and receive appropriate counseling, care, and follow-up while in custody.
• CL10 Page 87
  RECOMMENDATIONS RES. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R3. MADF add discharge planning Sheriff The Recommendation will be The Grand Jury acknowledges that hours to strengthen hand-offs to implemented. The County was the Recommendation will be appropriate health care providers by awarded a U.S. Department of implemented. December 31, 2019. Justice grant in 2018 to improve access to and delivery of services to offenders with co-occurring substance abuse and mental illness when they leave incarceration to re-enter the community. The grant funds additional discharge planning hours. R4. MADF consult with an outside Sheriff The Recommendation will not The Grand Jury understands that the medical specialist to review its be implemented. The formulary Recommendation will not be HIV/AIDS drug protocols and of approved medications implemented as Wellpath produce a report by December 31, established by Wellpath meets procedures appear to be sufficient. 2019. most needs, but there is also a process in place for the physician specialist who provides care to inmates with HIV/AIDS to request non- formulary drug substitutions when medically justified. R5. MADF re-evaluate its policy Sheriff The Recommendation will be The Grand Jury acknowledges that on the use of support medications implemented. The Sheriff’s the Recommendation will be for opioid abuse reflecting current Office is in the process of implemented. best practices by December 31, evaluating its policy on the use 2019. of Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) and has held several informational meetings with medical professionals. We will also be closely monitoring the progress of a state-funded three-year MAT study at San Francisco County detention facilities.
• CL11 Page 91
  THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH BUDGET RES = Respondent BOS = Board of Supervisors CAO = County Administrative Officer DHS = Director of Health and Human Services DHR = Director of Human Resources ACTTC = Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector BHD = Behavioral Health Division RECOMMENDATIONS RES. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R1. The CAO’s office create and BOS BOS: Recently developed The Grand Jury acknowledges that maintain policy and procedure and DHS-specific budget policies the Recommendation will be manuals for each DHS department, CAO and procedures are being implemented. and desk manuals for all positions implemented. CAO will in Fiscal and Behavioral Health oversee the completion of Divisions by December 31, 2019 these changes CAO: DHS has developed budget policies and procedures. The CAO will work with the Dept. to ensure implementation. R2. DHS prioritize DHS The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges that implementation of the Avatar implemented. the Recommendation has been system by December 31, 2019 implemented. R3. BHD include all managers in DHS The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges that budget development and review by implemented. the Recommendation has been December 31, 2019 implemented. R4. BHD institute procedures for DHS The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges that effective and respectful staff implemented. the Recommendation has been communication and support at all implemented. levels by December 31, 2019 R5. DHS continue and expedite DHS The Recommendation will be The Grand Jury acknowledges that the CBO contract evaluation and implemented. A consultant will the Recommendation will be build performance metrics by be hired to assist in creating a implemented. December 31, 2019 contract evaluation process which can be active for contract renewals in July 2020. R6. DHS and BHD receive DHR The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges that continued training in government and implemented. the Recommendation has been finance by December 31, 2019 DHS implemented.
• CL12 Page 87
  RECOMMENDATIONS RES. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R7. DHS hire a CFO who is DHS The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges that experienced in government finance and implemented. the Recommendation has been and systems DHR implemented. R8. The County Auditor’s Office ACTTC The ACTTC wholly disagrees The Grand Jury understands the institute procedures for verifying with the Finding upon which ACTTC’s explanation for its actual revenue figures, rather than the Recommendation is based, disagreement with the Finding and verifying that projected budgets and, therefore, the its reasons for not implementing the balance, by December 31, 2019 Recommendation will not be Recommendation. The Grand Jury implemented. In explanation of notes, however, that, while the its disagreement with the ACTTC’s current policies are Finding and Recommendation, effective for what they are designed the ACTTC states that current to do, as the ACTTC itself states, policies are effective for what these policies are not designed to, they are designed to do. They and have not prevented, successive include review of individual years of large deficits. The ACTTC transactions and review of asserts that this is not its account balances. In addition, responsibility. We encourage the extra scrutiny is provided for BOS to work with the Department departments considered to be of Behavioral Health and the at risk for errors, including County Administrator to implement DHS. Preparation for Sonoma the appropriate procedure. County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report also provides a review of account balances. The authority and responsibility to prepare and evaluate budgeted revenues and expenditures lies with the department, management, the County Administrator, and the Board of Supervisors. R9. The Compliance Program be DHS The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges that adequately funded and supported, implemented. the Recommendation has been by December 31, 2019 implemented. R10. We recommend the BOS BOS Budget shortfall has been met The Grand Jury acknowledges that review its budget oversight by one-time County the BOS has approved responsibilities by December 31, discretionary funding. Staff is implementation of the 2019. reviewing policies and Recommendation. procedures to be consistent across the Department.
• CL13 Page 93
  MANAGING PUBLIC PROPERTIES IN SONOMA COUNTY ACTTC = Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector BOS = Board of Supervisors CAO = County Administrative Officer GSD = General Services Department DHS = Department of Health Services CAFR = Comprehensive Annual Financial Report RECOMMENDATIONS RESP. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R1. The ACTTC (Auditor- ACTTC The Recommendation will not The Grand Jury acknowledges that Controller-Treasurer-Tax and be implemented because the policy FA-1 will be updated to Collector) establish a procedure BOS tracking and reporting of clarify the possibility of asset by October 1, 2019, to planned, actual and deferred impairment. supplement Capital Assets Policy maintenance activities is not FA-1 with deferred maintenance the responsibility of the The Grand Jury agrees that the BOS reporting comparable to that in ACTTC, and because it is not is responsible for designating which Federal Accounting Standards appropriate to apply Federal department shall consistently track SFFAS 6, 40 & 42. Accounting Standards in the and report deferred maintenance for preparation of the County's purposes of both management and CAFR. public disclosure. In order for the response to be compliant with Penal We agree that accurate Code 933.05(b)(4), the BOS must information on deferred clearly designate responsibility for maintenance should be tracking and reporting deferred provided to the Board of maintenance. Supervisors consistently and timely. A report designed for internal management use can meet the County's needs rather than one designed for external users, such as the CAFR. The purpose of Fiscal Policy FA-1 is to have a uniform method of maintaining capital asset records and accounting for capital assets. We will update policy FA-1 to make it clear that significant deferred maintenance can cause impairment. If the County needs a policy specifically related to the tracking and reporting of required or deferred maintenance of County-owned assets, it should be created by the department(s) with oversight and authority of that activity, i.e., County Administrator and General Services.
• CL14 Page 93
  RECOMMENDATIONS RESP. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R2. The CAO obtain an CAO The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges that independent cost analysis and and implemented. the Recommendation has been justification of deferred GSD implemented. maintenance on capital assets from each department head and present to the BOS by March 2020, and following on an annual basis. R3. The County Administrator CAO The Recommendation requires It is the Grand Jury’s understanding work with department heads to and further analysis. The County that the EFS Asset Management evaluate and take advantage of GSD purchased and implemented module currently in use has the EFS Capital Asset EFS Asset Management to capabilities beyond accounting and Management module to avoid provide a centralized finance that have not been duplication, consolidate data, accounting system to track implemented. Timely adoption of provide cost savings, and report capital assets. Additional asset these unused features would be cost updates to the Board of management modules were not effective and would streamline Supervisors by December 31, purchased. The CAO will procedures and make information 2019. direct the General Services on County assets more available to Director to work with ACTTC decision makers. staff to determine whether additional modules are needed. R4. The County Administrator BOS The Recommendation has been The Grand Jury acknowledges the and the Board of Supervisors and implemented. To avoid progress that the BOS has made in budget regularly for facility CAO significant increases in deferred securing funding to remediate maintenance at levels consistent maintenance costs for County deferred maintenance of County with recommended industry facilities, the BOS adopted a facilities. It remains a desirable standards by December 31, 2019 Facility Maintenance and goal for the BOS and CAO to Investment/Deferred commit to budgeting for facility Maintenance Funding policy. maintenance consistent with Per the policy, the BOS will industry standards going forward. appropriate, for a 5-year period beginning in FY 2017-2018, 40% of all new property tax growth to the Capital Projects Budget to address deferred maintenance of County facilities. A number of critical deferred maintenance projects have since been mitigated.
• CL15 Page 93
  RECOMMENDATIONS RESP. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R5. The Director of Health DHS The Recommendation has not The Grand Jury appreciates the Services reduce employee and been implemented and will not DHS’s intentions for its employees’ public exposure to hazards, be implemented. The DHS health and welfare and understands minimize risks of OSHA and takes the health, welfare, and that Administration and Behavioral liability exposure by enforcing a safety of its employees Health employees are now working higher level of maintenance by seriously and provides training in safe and appropriate conditions. December 31, 2019. and resources to ensure safety in the work place. The Department is not authorized nor responsible to maintain work facilities for health staff as cited in the Grand Jury report. Notwithstanding, DHS has acted to improve the work conditions of its administration and behavioral health employees by moving to safe and appropriate facilities. In partnership with the GSD, it is making improvements to its public health facilities. CAO The Recommendation will not The Grand Jury recognizes that and be implemented because it is cooperation between GSD and the GSD not warranted. GSD has been HR Department in this matter is a working with Risk positive step and addresses the Management Division of the spirit of the Recommendation. Human Resources Department to identify and mitigate employee and public exposure to hazards, and to minimize risks of OSHA and liability exposure.
• CL16 Page 93
  RECOMMENDATIONS RESP. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R6. The County Administrator CAO The Recommendation requires The Grand Jury understands that the and the General Services Director and further analysis. General GSD and CAO will work together assign resources such as sufficient GSD Services Facilities to determine the most cost-effective staffing for determining and Development and Management way to proceed. setting deferred maintenance employs licensed professionals valuations by December 31, 2019. with extensive experience in cost estimating. Because GSD staff are 100% cost recoverable, updating deferred maintenance valuations has been a low priority. Further analysis is necessary to quantify the staff hours needed to update and maintain deferred maintenance valuations and its impact on other projects. Best management practice is to reassess facility conditions every five years; outstanding deferred maintenance items will be re-estimated during that process. GSD will work with the CAO to evaluate resource needs and report to the BOS by June 30, 2020 as part of the FY 2020-27 Capital Improvement Program recommendations and Annual Budget.
• CL17 Page 93
  RECOMMENDATIONS RESP. RESPONSES 2019-2020 GJ OBSERVATIONS R7. ACTTC review assets with ACTTC The Recommendation has The Grand Jury acknowledges that accumulated deferred been partially implemented. the Recommendation will be maintenance and adjust the record ACTTC reviews assets implemented. of accumulated depreciation if annually for impairment. material impairment is found by Prior to year-end, ACTTC July 1, 2020. sends a Financial Reporting Survey to all County departments with assets in the financial system. Responses to the Survey are reviewed by the financial reporting team, and any adjustments for impairment losses are recorded. The ACTTC will expand the Financial Reporting Survey, beginning with the June 30, 2020 Survey, to specifically include an example of impairment caused by significant deferred maintenance. Assets that are reported as potentially impaired due to deferred maintenance will be run through the asset impairment test and reported appropriately in the CAFR.
• CL18 Page 98
  How to File a Citizen’s Complaint The Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury is an investigative body, which may examine all aspects of County and City government, public schools and special districts. The Civil Grand Jury’s mission is to exercise oversight of these entities to ensure that they are working to serve the best interests of its citizens. Citizens who feel that they have been unfairly treated by any county government organization or any city have the right to file a complaint with the Civil Grand Jury. If you have a grievance within these jurisdictions, a Citizen Complaint Form may be filled out for review. All complaints and investigations are confidential. Forms, in both English and Spanish, can be found at www.sonomagrandjury.org
• CL19 Page 99
  THE SONOMA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY P.O.Box 5109  Santa Rosa,California 95402  (707) 565-6330 http://www.sonoma.courts.ca.gov/ CITIZEN COMPLAINT FORM – CONFIDENTIAL The Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury is an investigative body that deals with complaints falling within its jurisdiction. The Grand Jury may examine all aspects of county and city government, public schools, redevelopment agencies and special districts. PERSON FILING COMPLAINT Name: _________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip: _________________________________________________________ EmailAddress: _________________________________________________________ Phone: _________________________________________________________ Date: _________________________________________________________ DESCRIBE YOUR COMPLAINT Identify the person(s) and /or the County or City government, school, agency, or special district that is the subject of this complaint. The complaint should clearly state specific and verifiable facts. (Include all names, dates, places, etc.) Note: All information will be held in the strictest confidence. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ June 2020 Page 1of 2
• CL20 Page 100
  What other agencies, officials or persons have you contacted about this matter? What was (has been) their response to you? (Give names, addresses, phone numbers, contacts, dates.) ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Is the subject matter of your compliant currently involved in litigation? No _____ YES ____ Do not know ______ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ What action are you expecting from the Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ It is a crime to knowingly make a false report to the Grand Jury that a felony or misdemeanor has been committed. (CA Penal Code No 148.5.(d)) Attach copies of all pertinent documents and correspondence. Use additional sheets if necessary. Signature: _______________________________________Date: ___________________ Please Note: signed submissions are more likely to be considered. Mail this completed form to: THE SONOMA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY P.O. Box 5109 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 or Email to: [email protected] June 2020 Page 2 of 2

Commendations 3

• CM1 Page 23
  The Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury commends the Sheriff’s Office and Coroner’s Office for:  Dealing effectively with the backlog problem. (F2)  Restructuring responsibilities in the Coroner’s Office. (F2)  Settling the pathology contract issues. (F1)  Adding a modern case management system.
• CM2 Page 36
  To understand the needs of homeless youth and the programs that serve them, the Grand Jury met with representatives of NGO service providers and County employees from departments that provide direct services or engage third-party service providers. The passion and compassion shown by these people was remarkable. Without exception, they are extremely dedicated to their jobs and work tirelessly and creatively to provide appropriate services to this vulnerable population. This is so even though they face the challenges of inadequate resources, unstable funding sources and the considerable administrative demands associated with state and federally funded programs.
• CM3 Page 57
  The 2019-2020 Sonoma County Civil Grand Jury wishes to acknowledge that government agencies and service providers have strived to improve services for the homeless. In addition, the Grand Jury specifically commends: C1. Sonoma County and the Cities of Santa Rosa and Petaluma for creating the Leadership Council when they did and as they did. While the LC was created more quickly than desirable in a perfect world, there was a need to act quickly in order to continue to obtain federal Continuum of Care (CoC) and state funds. C2. The Leadership Council for changing the Coordinated Entry System to allow 50/50 shelter admissions. C3. The County for putting the Department of Health Services (DHS) and the Community Development Commission (CDC) under single leadership in January 2020. This connection of services for the same homeless population should make communication and coordination more effective and efficient than it was under the previous separation of programs. C4. The County for opening the temporary indoor shelter, with a navigation center, at the Los Guilicos site.

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

No Responses Found 2

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