⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 8 findings
F1
Other than fire drills and drop drills, not all school sites practice with regularity (a minimum of annually) crisis management procedures that include evacuations. Some schools stated they do “round table” practices, as opposed to actually conducting a physical practice. Some sites stated they did not want to scare the students, so, therefore, do not have practices. One school stated that they do summer practices that do not include the children.
F2
No evidence was found that schools include parents or the community in an educational component to inform them about the crisis plan adopted by the district and site.
F3
Although considered a work in progress, the Office of Emergency Services has not actually walked the grounds of every school site. Therefore, OES does not have a digital image of the sites not visited, nor indication of possible unique or special needs in their BowMac computer system should a crisis occur. Also in progress is the development of live school-site images which can be viewed in law enforcement vehicles - to be used as events are unfolding and as units are rushing to the scene.
F4
Not all schools have conducted, or been a part of, an integrated evacuation which includes OES and/or other response units.
F5
Neither OES nor EDCOE keeps records of site visits by OES with regard to training for crisis management. 4
F6
With advance notification, the Board of Supervisors can discontinue these subsidies. The County has a fiduciary responsibility to minimize them, preferably without degrading fire protection capabilities. Elimination of the subsidies would require these fire protection districts to either find other sources of revenue in a similar amount, or find equivalent budget savings that would not degrade fire protection capability.
F7
Consolidation of the six West Slope subsidized fire districts, and especially mergers into the three financially stronger fire districts on the West Slope, should allow elimination of the fire chiefs and other administrative positions in the subsidized districts. The potential personnel savings that could result are shown in Exhibit C, where the administrative personnel costs for each fire district are shown in column L, with a total amount of $944,084. The County supplemental contributions for these fire districts are shown in column M, and the total amount is similar to the total administrative personnel costs shown in column L.
F8
If supplemental payments to the six West Slope fire protection districts are eliminated, the savings to the County general fund will be recurrent, rather than one-time. Over ten years and with an annual increase of 9 percent, the SAVINGS will amount to $14,018,235. If supplemental payments to all eight subsidized fire districts are eliminated, the SAVINGS over ten years will amount to $19,665,148.
Recommendations 5
-
R1The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
-
R2The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.*
-
R3The 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 an agency of department being investigated or reviewed. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. **
-
R4The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. * The time frame needs to be specific and reasonable. ** At the conclusion of this analysis, the recommendation must be responded to as required by items 1, 2, or 4. RESPONSE: TIME, WHERE AND TO WHOM The Penal Code identifies two different response times, depending upon the classification of the respondent (see below), and includes where and to whom the response is directed. Day one begins with the date of the Final Report.
-
R5The Grand Jury recommends that both OES and EDCOE, as well as individual school sites and districts, keep emergency response records that include dates of training and practice - to be maintained and supervised by EDCOE. RESPONSES Response(s) to this report is required in accordance with California Penal Code §933.05. 5 -025 REASON FOR REPORT The Fire Protection District Law of 1987, in the State Health and Safety Code §13800, governs all of the Fire Protection Districts (FPDs) in California. Fire protection districts can only provide fire protection and emergency medical services. At the printing of the 3rd edition of “What’s So Special About Special Districts?” there were 386 FPDs in California. El Dorado County has nine FPDs on the West Slope and two FPDs in the Tahoe Basin. The County also has two multi-purpose Community Service Districts (CSDs) that provide fire protection along with other services: Fallen Leaf Lake CSD and Cameron Park CSD. The City of South Lake Tahoe has its own fire department. El Dorado County has a disproportionately high number of fire protection districts compared with the average of other counties in California. El Dorado County would benefit from consolidation. During the Grand Jury investigation, the scope was limited to the West Slope of the County
Commendations 4
-
CM1 Page 31Louisiana Schnell Elementary School, under the leadership of the district superintendent and the site principal, has created and maintained an educational plant that is safe and healthy, as well as welcoming to its students, staff, parents, and community. The 2007-2008 Grand Jury commends Louisiana Schnell School for its exemplary campus safety and beautification. It is evident that the superintendent, principal, staff, and parents are successfully addressing all facility issues. 25 The 2007-2008 EL DORADO COUNTY GRAND JURY COMMENDS The Staff and Community of Louisiana Schnell Elementary School For its exemplary campus beautification and maintenance Date: Signed: EL DORADO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2007-2008 Edwin Markham Middle School REASON FOR REPORT The El Dorado County Grand Jury conducts inspections of county, city and special district facilities owned or leased within El Dorado County per California Penal Codes §925, §925(a) and §928. The focus of the inspection is health and safety conditions. 22
-
CM2 Page 32The Staff and Community of Louisiana Schnell Elementary School For its exemplary campus beautification and maintenance Date: Signed: EL DORADO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2007-2008 Edwin Markham Middle School REASON FOR REPORT The El Dorado County Grand Jury conducts inspections of county, city and special district facilities owned or leased within El Dorado County per California Penal Codes §925, §925(a) and §928. The focus of the inspection is health and safety conditions. 22
-
CM3 Page 34Edwin Markham Middle School, under the leadership of the district superintendent and the site principal, has created and maintained an educational plant that is safe, as well as welcoming to its students, staff, parents, and community. The 2007-2008 Grand Jury commends Edwin Markham Middle School for improving the educational environment. It is evident that the superintendent and principal are successfully addressing all areas of health, safety and attractiveness. 23 The 2007-2008 EL DORADO COUNTY GRAND JURY COMMENDS Edwin Markham Middle School For continuing improvement of its educational environment Date: Signed: EL DORADO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2007-2008 El Dorado County Sheriff’s Building REASON FOR REPORT The El Dorado County Grand Jury conducts inspections of county, city and special district facilities owned or leased within El Dorado County per California Penal Codes §925, §925(a) and §928. The focus of the inspection is health and safety conditions. 26
-
CM4 Page 35Edwin Markham Middle School For continuing improvement of its educational environment Date: Signed: EL DORADO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2007-2008 El Dorado County Sheriff’s Building REASON FOR REPORT The El Dorado County Grand Jury conducts inspections of county, city and special district facilities owned or leased within El Dorado County per California Penal Codes §925, §925(a) and §928. The focus of the inspection is health and safety conditions. 26
No Responses Found 3
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
County of El Dorado
Agency
El Dorado County County Superintendent of Schools
Elected County Office
El Dorado County Sheriff
Elected County Office