Covid-19 The 2019-2020 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury is issuing its reports

Conclusions 19

• CL1 Page 375
  Fire emergency responses account for a minority of all emergency calls, and medical calls have increased dramatically since 1980. Medical response targets should be measured and communicated.
• CL2 Page 375
  Other out of County agencies convey how they were performing against national standards and agency goals, but the Grand Jury found no such reports for Santa Cruz County.
• CL3 Page 375
  There is a degradation in the quality of reporting of 911 response time, a lack of data reported from some fire districts, and inconsistent reporting practices from those that do.
• CL4 Page 375
  LAFCO merely summarizes the self-assessment performed by the fire agencies in Santa Cruz County.
• CL5 Page 375
  There are significant inconsistencies in response time data across jurisdictions. In the event of a wildfire, can the public be alerted, evacuated, or sheltered in time? The Grand Jury was unable to affirmatively answer this very important question, ​​ but found:
• CL6 Page 375
  Table top simulations are performed by the Office of Emergency Services (OES)
• CL7 Page 375
  No evidence of the publication to the public of the evacuation study performed for PG&E in 2019, by experts in the field.
• CL8 Page 375
  A lack of attention to road maintenance on designated evacuation routes.
• CL9 Page 375
  A population undersubscribed to the CodeRED™Alert System used by the County.
• CL10 Page 375
  No evidence of designated, published shelter locations and little evidence of awareness of potential shelters on evacuation routes.
• CL11 Page 375
  Santa Cruz County’s Emergency Management Plan is both out of date and updated infrequently. Is the public sufficiently educated about fire risk and prepared to mitigate personal property and community risk? The answer to this question is unequivocally ​​ no. Perhaps more could be done with outreach. Perhaps more could be done leveraging the media and with increased attention to youth. The challenge though is getting the attention of those residents at risk, and getting them to act. The solution to this challenge clearly is with the community itself and its leaders. How well do the fire agencies and the governing bodies in counties and cities make data-driven decisions and hold responsible leaders accountable for their results? At the County level, the Grand Jury believes there is much room for ​ improvement in both quantitative budgeting, decision making, and holding those responsible accountable to their commitments. Commitments can be made either by contract, by state code, or as benchmark standards of service. Fire districts appear to pay the most attention to data. For cities, the Grand Jury is aware of the challenges fire departments face in competing for general funding. For this reason, governing bodies should pay increased attention to establishing appropriate priorities for addressing critical fire safety needs. Published July 3, 2020 55 of 97 376 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
• CL12 Page 76
  In this report, the Grand Jury has articulated authoritative and consensus requirements for robust risk identification, assessment, management, and communication. These requirements and standards were then used to evaluate the risk profile for each of the cities in SCC and the state of risk management practices currently in place. Our findings indicate that all of our cities are just one economic shock away from serious financial distress and that their current approach to risk management is not adequate to effectively manage and mitigate the range of risks that are typically confronted by local governments. With the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting economic consequences, the financial risk and associated operational risks we discussed will likely be realized. We will soon see how the cities move forward to minimize the impacts of the current crisis. It is also the time to ask if there are ways that we can better prepare for the future shocks that will come our way. The Grand Jury hopes that our findings and recommendations contribute positively to this discussion.
• CL13 Page 109
  The 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury investigated whether respondents to the five 2016-17 Grand Jury reports examined had honored their commitments. We found that generally, organizations fulfilled the commitments they made to the public. To keep the public informed, all organizations should create and sustain a formal record of the actions they took and continue to take.
• CL14 Page 141
  The original California election statutes governing distribution of voter registration data were formulated in the mid-1990’s, long before data theft and breaches became commonplace.[66] [67] County election departments should examine their processes to ​​ ​ ​ make sure that best practices are being employed, and all precautions are being taken to ensure that voter registration data is secure.
• CL15 Page 142
  142 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
• CL16 Page 190
  The period from November 2018 through the present day has been particularly tumultuous, divisive, and painful for the Santa Cruz City Leadership and City Staff, and the Community. The consensus among Grand Jury interviewees was trust and communications were broken on many levels. Few expressed confidence that a culture of trust and open communication could be re-established. The Council-Manager form of city government requires and assumes a partnership between City Council and City Staff.[201] It cannot function effectively if there is ​ ​​ ​ unresolved conflict among those parties. It might be reasonable to conclude that the dysfunction was situational rather than systemic. The root causes of divisions in the City might have been the coincidence of an alleged progressive majority and attempts at tackling the complex and incendiary labyrinths of affordable housing and homelessness. But the Grand Jury heard testimony and found evidence to the contrary. We learned that divisions existed prior to November 2018, and that the recall, if it were to be successful, would do little to heal those divisions. After the presentation of CRC findings to the City Council, Councilmembers expressed sadness over the conflicts that led to CRC involvement. But they did not fully acknowledge or take responsibility for their roles in the conflict, nor did they pledge to apply what they had learned to future conduct, or suggest that ongoing work and training in conflict resolution should be a high priority.[202] ​ ​ ​ Currently, in part due to COVID-19 constraints of remote proceedings and dial-in public comment, City Council meetings are outwardly less contentious. But what lessons were learned from the last 18 months that could provide guidance to Council and City Staff, working as a team, to improve their performance in solving existing and future crises? In a May 7, 2020 memorandum, the City Manager estimated that the City now faces huge budget deficits in the next 2 fiscal years.[203] These deficits will lead to substantial ​ ​​ ​ pain and hardship for the City and its residents. Surveys, Grand Jury testimony, and public comment have all demonstrated a lack of confidence in City Leadership. Can Council and City Staff restore trust and accountability in the midst of these challenges?
• CL17 Page 191
  2019–2020 Consolidated Final Report 191 When times are tough, it is tempting to conclude that there isn’t time to work on organizational improvements, and that all resources should be focused on getting through the tough times. But impacts of dysfunction are amplified during such times. Weaknesses are revealed that may hinder optimal response. This report suggests many improvements to City strategy, policies, and process. But as the legendary educator and business management guru Peter Drucker remarked, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast."[204] In other words, policies and strategy are ​ ​​ ​ important but without a culture of trust, transparency, teamwork and effective communications, even the best strategy will not lead to organizational success. Trust is a commodity that is lost quickly and regained slowly. For the City of Santa Cruz, now is time to begin restoring that trust. The Grand Jury therefore respectfully submits the following findings and recommendations.
• CL18 Page 279
  The issue of homelessness in Santa Cruz County is not new, nor is it going to be solved overnight. Santa Cruz County has a lot of challenging work ahead. There are five key areas this Grand Jury has identified that are in need of attention. First and foremost is the need for the community and the elected leadership to work more closely together to come up with solutions to address the multitude of issues faced by the County. Education of the community to the realities of the homeless problem, and engaging the community more into the process would allow elected officials to exercise the political will needed to provide additional housing and services throughout the County. Second, there is a need for a new governance structure to be accountable for managing the complexity of the homeless problem, and it is recommended the County consider the formation of a JPA, a legal entity with representation from all the Cities in the County. The JPA would need strong leadership to oversee the allocation of funding, take responsibility for measuring and tracking effectiveness, and hold organizations accountable for non-performance. Third, additional funding must be allocated to improve services and increase case managers available to homeless individuals. To minimize the cycling in and out of the judicial and medical systems due to illnesses such as mental health and substance abuse, and to reduce burden on law enforcement, the county should adopt a 24-hour crisis response team similar to Oregon’s CAHOOTS team. Funding is also needed to increase the number of shelter beds and permanent supportive housing if Santa Cruz County is ever to make a dent in the overall number of homeless persons in the County. The promotion of ADUs to increase the supply of affordable housing would reduce the strain on the housing market which is forcing so many to live on the streets, in their cars, or on someone’s couch. Fourth, Santa Cruz County and Santa Cruz Cities should be more effective in utilizing existing resources. County and City owned land should be made available to provide safe parking, and to build easily constructed homeless communities, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing using a variety of shelter options such as tiny homes and trailers. In addition, there is a need for closer engagement with local businesses and faith-based organizations who can be significant assets in providing solutions to the homeless crisis. And finally, all participants in the homelessness effort must be rowing in the same direction. New data gathering and measuring mechanisms need to be adopted by all agencies supporting the homeless. Consistent and accurate data is vital to enable the entire system to work effectively for all.
• CL19 Page 280
  280 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury

Commendations 5

• CM1 Page 33
  C1. The Grand Jury would like to recognize that the DeLaveaga Golf Course maintenance staff has performed exemplary work in maintaining the course, given its reduction in staff and unfortunate constraints on water use.
• CM2 Page 143
  C1. The Grand Jury sets a high bar when issuing commendations. Performance of an agency must far exceed due diligence and expectations. We concur with the 2016-2017 Grand Jury and commend the Santa Cruz County Clerk and the Santa Cruz County Elections Department for their exemplary performance of one of the most complex and indispensable functions of local government—the democratic process of voting. The Santa Cruz County Elections Department demonstrates accountability, agility, responsiveness, transparency, attention to detail, desire for improvement, and forward-looking planning—all key indicators of outstanding leadership and process.
• CM3 Page 228
  C1. The Aptos and Central Fire Districts are commended for the persistence shown in their safety citations, re-inspections, and consistency of reporting.
• CM4 Page 284
  C1. The Grand Jury would like to commend the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors and the Santa Cruz County Human Services Agency for building the South County Behavioral Health facility, thereby expanding behavioral health services in the South County. C2. The Grand Jury would like to commend the vast number of individuals, non-profits, faith-based organizations and County agencies, who are dedicated and working hard to support and reduce the homeless population in Santa Cruz County.
• CM5 Page 228
  C1. The Aptos and Central Fire Districts are commended for the organizational merging of their fire districts.

Agency Responses 1

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