Cal Fire Czu Battalion 4 Pajaro Valley Fpd Santa Cruz County Fire

Vegetation/fuel management and abatement are not receiving the attention nor funding needed from the County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors, and therefore are not adhering to California Government Executive Order 1.8.19-EO- N-05-19. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Vegetation/fuel management and abatement is the responsibility of the property owner, not the County of Santa Cruz. The County could do more to improve the clearing or removal of vegetation along County-maintained roadways, more than just the sight line clear that may or may not occur annually. The removal of vegetation is expensive and labor intensive for a county that provides many services to the community. I would add that funding is available through different grant opportunities to assist with fuel reduction and the County has benefited from such grants.

Santa Cruz County residents are at increased risk of fire danger due to the lack of risk management for wildfire. Specific risks are not formally identified, tracked, assessed for impact, nor is progress reported by fire departments in the County. Therefore, leaders responsible for budgets and accountability are left unprepared to manage risk, impact, or performance. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

City and County officials have not collaborated with PG&E to identify the location of high risk PG&E electrical equipment, and so are left uninformed as to how to manage their responsibilities or how to instruct residents about potential danger due to proximity to this equipment. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): County officials have done what they can as it relates to discussions with PG&E to determine the locations of high-risk electrical equipment in the County. The underlying question is, has PG&E been fully transparent in sharing the information needed for officials to provide information and guidance to the public?

Santa Cruz County would greatly benefit if steps were taken to implement the CAL FIRE, San Mateo - Santa Cruz Unit 2018 recommendation of developing detailed, site specific Community Wildfire Protection Plans for communities throughout the County. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Response time data for fire departments in Santa Cruz County is challenging to obtain. Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 previously reported response time data in their annual reports, but did not do so in the 2018 or 2019 annual reports. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Roadside vegetation in rural areas of the County is not being cleared consistently which could potentially increase emergency response time, putting life and property in unnecessary danger. Furthermore, evacuations could be restricted as there is no rule or program that mandates that roads, even critical evacuation routes, be kept cleared meeting defensible space requirements. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

There are only approximately 17,000 accounts for the Santa Cruz County opt-in CodeRED™ emergency system, which implies that a significant portion of the County may not receive emergency alert messages, which potentially reduces residents’ opportunity to take action in a timely, life-saving manner. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs), have been deployed in other areas of the state and have proven effective tools in alerting residents in urban and rural areas to a wildfire. However, Santa Cruz County has no such devices, increasing the risk to County residents. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The use of LRADs have proven useful in certain applications. The main factor is public compliance with the use. When activated, will the public react? It has been difficult to gain compliance from the public during evacuations using conventional methods such as reverse 911 or CodeRed alerts. The cost to purchase these systems, as well as their maintenance, is very high.

High risk communities in the County are left unnecessarily vulnerable due to the lack of easily accessible, published information of refuge/assembly areas and structures. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): In the event of an emergency requiring evacuation, it is important to take into consideration that early notification is a key factor. The public needs to comply with those requests or orders to evacuate. The use of temporary refuse areas (TRAs) is somewhat of a new concept and is under consideration by many fire agencies. I’m confident that once TRAs are established they will be made public. The County fire agencies have had established evacuation plans in place since 2010. These plans have not been made public as they are used as an internal decision-making tool during the management of incidents.

Because the County does not publish a “shelter in place” plan, when a fire expands rapidly, residents cannot make informed decisions about whether to shelter in place or evacuate. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Decisions to shelter in place are a last resort in the event of an evacuation order. These decisions are made by the law enforcement agency with jurisdiction, with significant input from the fire agency with jurisdiction. When the public shelters in place it needs to be in a structure that has its defensible space and would be considered a standalone structure that would be able to sustain an approaching fire as it passes. Defensible space is a key factor in sheltering in place.

Unlike the City of Santa Cruz, the County does not publish emergency evacuation routes, purportedly to avoid having old or untimely information being followed in an emergency. The County therefore withholds revealing evacuation routes until an emergency is in progress, likely creating unnecessary risk and potential for chaos. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The public needs to know how to get in and out of the community they live in, in the event of a vegetation fire. Having predesignated evacuation routes can cause confusion in a community. When a fire blocks that evacuation route, it causes congestion, that can cause the loss of life. Knowing multiple exit routes can be extremely helpful to residents in leaving the area. The publishing of multiple exit routes is a consideration when evacuation plans are updated.

In the Wildland Urban Interface zone, and in many town centers, traffic choke points exist, and in some instances have roadway obstacles to traffic flow such as overgrown vegetation, concrete medians, curbs, and lane reductions resulting in roads that are inadequate for mass evacuations. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Wildfire preparedness informational materials are well done and public education is attempted by fire departments in the County, but fails to sufficiently reach and motivate residents to act. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): How easy is it to forget that Santa Cruz County has experienced five significant fires in recent history from 2008 to 2019, all having the potential of being a CAMP Fire. It is easy to say it won’t happen to me or here! The public needs to do its part and take the information and apply it to their situation. The motivation should be taking a vested interest in protecting your family, your neighbor’s family, and your property.

The FireWise institution provides a valuable fire prevention program and, as of March 2020, there were eight FireWise communities registered in the County. Marin County, by contrast, with a similar population, has sixty registered communities, highlighting the need for more FireWise promotion and participation in Santa Cruz County. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The County Office of Emergency Services and fire agencies in the County encourage residents to be prepared for an emergency, however the passive mechanisms such as web sites used to encourage preparedness are not proving to be sufficient. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The public also must want to be involved in preparation for an emergency. There are some select areas that take the topic very seriously, but a good portion have the stance that, “Not here! This is Santa Cruz-- nothing happens here!”

Property owners in the County are responsible for their own vegetation management, yet they are often not sufficiently educated about vegetation management practices, or do not have the capability, financial resources, or desire to create defensible space. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

No single organization in the County is assuming a leadership role in Fire Hazard Mitigation. It is not clear whose responsibility it is to minimize this County wide risk. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Due to jurisdictional responsibility, it may be difficult to narrow the leadership role down to one agency. I think the fire agencies in general can take a more proactive approach in their respective jurisdictions to gain greater buy-in from the communities. The Santa Cruz Fire Safe Council has taken some type of role in the effort, but funding is the single most difficult obstacle to overcome. The second obstacle is property owners, and getting their permission or buy in on fuel reduction is difficult.

The annual report to the County Board of Supervisors and the County Administrative Office by County Fire/CAL FIRE does not provide data or analysis of resources, response times, code enforcement, inspection, or education. This information is necessary to show what gaps exist between current performance and community needs in order for informed budget decisions to be made. Without adequate background information, the Board of Supervisors is unable to hold CAL FIRE accountable for the specific responsibilities specified in their contract. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Reporting data, statistics, and formats utilized by fire agencies throughout the County are highly inconsistent, uncoordinated, and therefore not readily evaluated and compared. The standard Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating system would be useful to adopt. Response time data are not well described or consistently reported by the jurisdictions, making accurate assessment difficult, especially by other agencies or by the public. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Pajaro Valley FPD reviews response time data at each of the regular scheduled board meetings.

The 2015 County of Santa Cruz Emergency Operations Management plan does not adequately address evacuation, and references data too outdated to be useful, such as a population density map from the 2000 census. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The Grand Jury finds that formally specified baseline and target performance statements, in alignment with the Center for Public Safety Excellence Assessment Process, neither currently exist nor are they reported by fire departments in the County as required by best practice standards. There are no goals set or measures made of progress for review by the Board of Supervisors regarding County Fire/CAL FIRE performance. Other fire districts in the County are similarly remiss in reporting to their governing bodies. Appropriate goals would include progress on response times, vegetation management, and code inspection progress, all of which are necessary to properly quantify the budget and resources required for full-time, volunteer, and prison inmate workforces, in appropriate, affordable proportions. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Pajaro Valley FPD reviews its contract with CAL FIRE for performance as it relates to the cooperative fire protection agreement. This agreement contains a local operating plan which defines the goals and outlines the performance requirements of the agreement.