Score: +14 (21/19/7)

Contra Costa County Grand Jury • 2015-2016

Delta Levees in Contra Costa County How Well Do We Protect This Vital Safety System?

Published: May 26, 2016 32 pages

View Original PDF

⚠️ 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 and Recommendations 23 findings

The portion of the Delta that lies within Contra Costa County includes six of the eight western islands, deemed by the State to be of particular importance to preventing seawater intrusion that would impair the quality of water for nearly two- thirds of the State, including much of the East Bay area.

No recommendations for this finding

Loss (i.e. submersion) of any of the six islands in the Delta within Contra Costa County has potential to affect adversely much more than just Contra Costa County.

No recommendations for this finding

Key infrastructure located within the Contra Costa County reclamation districts benefits the entire County, including major County roads and highways, a rail-line, PG&E power transmission lines, natural gas wells, petroleum pipelines, Contra Costa Water District intakes, pumping stations, and portions of both the Contra Costa Canal and EBMUD’s Mokelumne aqueduct.

No recommendations for this finding

The levees in the County’s portion of the Delta have been built up or otherwise strengthened on a piecemeal basis over the century or more of their existence.

No recommendations for this finding

Because the levees remain vulnerable to natural hazards and human activities, they require constant vigilance – i.e., frequent inspection coupled with timely maintenance and prompt repairs.

No recommendations for this finding

The Army Corp of Engineers inspects federal levees, as well as non-federal levees that qualify for the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program.

No recommendations for this finding

All of our County’s levees are non-federal levees and the only non-federal levees in the County that qualify for participation in the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program are in Holland and Byron Reclamation Districts.

No recommendations for this finding

The only levees in the County that are independently evaluated for structural integrity are those in Reclamation Districts 800 and 2026, Holland and Byron.

No recommendations for this finding

LAFCO’s MSR of the reclamation districts, which it performs every 5-years, focuses on financial and administrative management of the districts.

No recommendations for this finding

F10

LAFCO relies on self-reported information from the districts, without physical inspection, to evaluate how well the districts are maintaining the integrity of the levees for which they are responsible.

Related Recommendations (1)

After identifying the necessary funding, LAFCO should consider including independent physical inspections of levee conditions, in addition to the self- reported evaluations of the conditions, in the MSRs of all County reclamation districts, if necessary by hiring an independent engineering firm to perform this function.

F11

There is no formal or standardized educational or training resource available to the districts for levee inspection, maintenance, and repair, which can support new levee superintendents or managers while they acquire the experience to recognize problems early, learn how to appropriately respond, and learn how to balance environmental regulations with maintenance protocols.

Related Recommendations (3)

After identifying the necessary funding, the County reclamation districts should collaborate in establishing and supporting a shared website, possibly approaching one of the Districts that already has a website to take the lead. This website should include “Best Practices”, a calendar of date- or seasonal-specific tasks, such as preparation for nesting season when certain work is prohibited, and dates when Subventions Program applications are due, and a common log of significant levee incidents to identify and track historical trouble spots.

After identifying the necessary funding, the County reclamation districts should consider taking turns hosting a short, local, annual conference for all District Board members and staff. Each conference should include an educational presentation on a matter of common interest, such as changes in regulations or levee standards, new technology or procedures for levee work, new sources of funding, and/or most effective techniques for successful grant applications.

After identifying the necessary funding, reclamation districts should consider adding a “training module” for new and re-elected Board members to their required governance training (i.e. Brown Act and Ethics). This “module” or session should cover the district’s levee regulations and protocols, the consequences of noncompliance with regulations and protocols, flood preparedness, and emergency response training – or at minimum a “back to basics” session with the consulting engineer to cover these concerns.

F12

Levee management requires recognizing seasonal timeframes and juggling multiple deadlines, including preparing for storm season and the “no-mowing” period, when local bird populations nest, as well as timely application for the subvention and/or special projects funding programs.

Related Recommendations (1)

F13

Unpermitted encroachments can hinder visual inspection of the levee surface and create new structural weaknesses or potential conduits for seepage.

No recommendations for this finding

F14

Education about the potential danger of unpermitted encroachments can be a highly effective management tool for mitigating this type of hazard because increased understanding of the potential consequences of such encroachments can support longer-term adherence to levee regulations and protocols.

No recommendations for this finding

F15

Since early recognition of potential trouble spots and prompt repair work are critical to maintaining levee integrity, while resources for levee patrols are limited, the presence of an educated and aware residential population can supply additional eyes to provide the constant vigilance that is crucial to safeguarding the levees.

No recommendations for this finding

F16

In addition to permitting procedures and intermittent newsletters, there are other opportunities to educate the public, and especially residents of reclamation districts, about the hazards that can damage or impair the levees.

Related Recommendations (2)

After identifying the necessary funding, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing the County Planning Department to provide each applicant for new construction or major remodeling in unincorporated areas within a reclamation district with a brochure or direction to an online website explaining levee safety rules and regulations, along with the reasons for same, applicable to their particular reclamation district and to require that each applicant confirm receipt of the brochure or link to website by initialing.

The Oakley City Council should direct the Oakley Planning Commission to provide each applicant for new construction or major remodeling within a reclamation district in the City of Oakley with a brochure or direction to an online website explaining levee safety rules and regulations, along with the reasons for same, applicable to their particular reclamation district and to require that each applicant confirm receipt of the brochure or link to website by initialing.

F17

Explaining the hazards to levees by multiple means at appropriate times -- i.e., just before the start of storm season in the fall – can help to keep awareness at a heightened and effective level.

Related Recommendations (2)

F18

Efforts to educate and raise public awareness could be enhanced by cross- departmental and/or cross-agency cooperation such as including Flood Control safety bulletins with other seasonally appropriate, apt-to-be-read or mandatory mailings such as property tax bills or voter information packets.

Related Recommendations (2)

After identifying the necessary funding, the County Tax Collector should consider including informational material on flood preparedness or levee safety precautions, available at no charge from our County Flood Control or Central Valley Flood Control Agency or DWR, with every property tax bill that has an address within a reclamation district.

After identifying the necessary funding, the County Clerk Recorder should consider including informational material on flood preparedness or levee safety precautions, available at no charge from our County Flood Control or Central Valley Flood Control Agency or DWR, with election materials sent to addresses within a reclamation district.

F19

It takes nearly 2 years from the application date for reclamation districts to receive reimbursement for levee maintenance work approved by DWR under the Subventions Program.

Related Recommendations (1)

R13

After identifying the necessary funding, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing the County’s Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee to establish a task force to investigate possible ways for the less-advantaged reclamation districts to obtain interim funding, including but not limited to grants or low-interest rate loans, to cover the initial two-year lag-time to obtain reimbursement for essential levee maintenance work from the Subventions Program.

F20

The cost of the initial funding required of reclamation districts under DWR’s Subventions Program can be prohibitive for some reclamation districts, resulting in under-utilization of this highly beneficial program.

Related Recommendations (1)

R13

F21

Some reclamation districts that are unable to maintain the staff, equipment, and material stockpiles needed for emergency major repairs, rely on informal mutual- aid arrangements.

Related Recommendations (1)

Reclamation districts should formalize, or at a minimum document, all “Mutual Aid” agreements for future reference as reclamation district personnel change over time.

F22

Planning agencies can require that developers who seek to develop areas within reclamation districts financially contribute to existing levees as a condition of approval of their proposed developments, as was done with the East Cypress Corridor Plan for residential development in the interior of Hotchkiss Tract, Reclamation District 799.

Related Recommendations (2)

R10

The Board of Supervisors should consider directing the appropriate planning and/or land use departments to follow the precedent established by the East Cypress Corridor Project and condition approval of proposals for new residential or commercial development, where allowed on any unincorporated County land in a reclamation district, on financial support of the existing levees.

R11

The City of Oakley should consider following the precedent established by the East Cypress Corridor Project and conditioning approval of proposals for new residential or commercial development, where proposed on Oakley’s annexed land in a reclamation district, on financial support of the existing levees.

F23

The feasibility of interagency cooperative ventures to accomplish levee improvements has been demonstrated by multi-agency coalition for to improve the levees in Reclamation District 2028, Bacon Island.

Related Recommendations (1)

R12

After identifying the necessary funding, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing the County’s Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee to establish a task force or initiate a staff study to investigate ways to encourage and facilitate grant-seeking coalitions of urban water agencies and/or other beneficiaries of the levee system, on smaller-scale projects with shorter time horizons than those currently being investigated by the Delta Protection Commission (i.e. similar to but including even smaller-scale projects than the Bacon Island improvement coalition).

Agency Responses 7

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

City of Oakley

September 27, 2016 • 4 pages • 9 responses • Score: +6 (+6, 3, 0) View Details ▾

PDF

9 responses to findings and recommendations

Loss (i.e. submersion) of any of the six islands in the Delta within Contra Costa County has potential to affect adversely much more than just Contra Costa County.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The City of Oakley partially disagrees with the finding. In addition to experience, training in these specific areas and collaboration with other agencies are also very critical. Finding No. 4: "Most police officer training related to human trafficking is acquired through working with more experienced officers and victim advocates." Response: The City of Oakley only partially disagrees with this finding. In-class training, coordination with other agencies, including non-profit organizations are other elements of training. Finding No. 5: "The required two-hour POST Training Video in dealing wit...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The levees in the County’s portion of the Delta have been built up or otherwise strengthened on a piecemeal basis over the century or more of their existence.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

: "Most police officer training related to human trafficking is acquired through working with more experienced officers and victim advocates." Response: The City of Oakley only partially disagrees with this finding. In-class training, coordination with other agencies, including non-profit organizations are other elements of training.

Because the levees remain vulnerable to natural hazards and human activities, they require constant vigilance – i.e., frequent inspection coupled with timely maintenance and prompt repairs.

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "The required two-hour POST Training Video in dealing with human trafficking complaints provides a general basis, but more intensive training found in the POST 2014 training manual contains in-depth coverage of the issues important to officers assigned to trafficking cases." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

The Army Corp of Engineers inspects federal levees, as well as non-federal levees that qualify for the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program.

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "Successful apprehension and prosecution of traffickers often involves coordination and cooperation among local, State and federal agencies." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "City law enforcement and Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department have no comprehensive or consistent method for analyzing data about the number and type of adult trafficking victims. More data that is complete is needed to define the magnitude of the problem and to support decisions about victim services and resource allocation." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

LAFCO’s MSR of the reclamation districts, which it performs every 5-years, focuses on financial and administrative management of the districts.

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "Trafficking frequently occurs in combination with other violent crimes and its victims often have a history of abuse and trauma." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding. 3 Finding No. 10: "The use of specialist multidisciplinary teams in high crime areas can increase the likelihood that trafficking will be recognized as a component of other crimes." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

F11

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "Public awareness is a critical factor in identifying potential human trafficking activity." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

F14

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "A comprehensive approach to dealing with human trafficking includes robust community engagement; training law enforcement in responding to human trafficking incidents; vigorous prosecution of perpetrators; education of and advocacy to policy makers; and wrap-around services for victims/survivors." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding. CIVIL GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation #1: Recommendation No. 1: "City law enforcement agencies and the Sheriff's Department should consider incorporating expanded training for officers assigned to trafficking-related duties." Respons...

City of Oakley

September 27, 2016 • 5 pages • 18 responses • Score: 0 (+5, 7, -5) View Details ▾

PDF

18 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented. The City Council designated affordable housing sites in the current Housing Element cycle and no affordable housing was increased in these areas. Within the Downtown PDA, the Downtown Specific Plan does encourage mixed-use development, though not specifically designated as "affordable." Recommendation #2: The city should consider adopting an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Response: This recommendation will be implemented and at a future date the City will consider once again an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance as part of a future Housing Eleme...

Loss (i.e. submersion) of any of the six islands in the Delta within Contra Costa County has potential to affect adversely much more than just Contra Costa County.

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "Plan Bay Area 2040 seeks to combine transportation, jobs and housing as a solution to the needs of our growing population." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

This recommendation will be implemented and at a future date the City will consider once again an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance as part of a future Housing Element update. Recommendation #3: The city should explore rehabilitating existing housing stock as affordable housing for purchase or rental, and identify funding to do so. Response: This recommendation has partially been implemented. Currently, the City has temporarily reduced development impact fees for residential 4 development which can assist in the rehabilitation of the existing housing stock. The City does not intend on pur...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The City of Oakley partially disagrees with this finding. Inclusionary Zoning requires the inclusion of affordable housing (or payment of a fee in lieu of units) in market rate developments. Separately, Density Bonus (both State law and local ordinance) provide incentives and regulatory waivers that may be afforded to the developer of affordable units. Inclusionary zoning units may be double-counted toward density bonus units which may lead to those incentives and waivers. Finding #6: "The city's Inclusionary Housing ordinance helps to provide affordable housing in the City." Response: The Cit...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation has partially been implemented. Currently, the City has temporarily reduced development impact fees for residential 4 development which can assist in the rehabilitation of the existing housing stock. The City does not intend on purchasing any residential units. Recommendation #5: The city should explore increasing existing "impact fees" or "linkage fees" or enacting such fees in order to generate revenue with which to assist funding affordable housing. Response: This recommendation will not be implemented and is not considered a priority for these fees by the City Council....

Because the levees remain vulnerable to natural hazards and human activities, they require constant vigilance – i.e., frequent inspection coupled with timely maintenance and prompt repairs.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Reclamation districts should formalize, or at a minimum document, all “Mutual Aid” agreements for future reference as reclamation district personnel change over time.

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented and is not considered a priority for these fees by the City Council. Recommendation #6: The city should consider designating an employee within the city's planning or housing department to coordinate with property management to maintain current waiting and interest lists of available affordable housing and ensure information is posted in the city website, and identifying funding to do so. Response: This recommendation has partially been implemented. The City's Planning Manager is in frequent communication with the affordable housing complexes locatio...

The Army Corp of Engineers inspects federal levees, as well as non-federal levees that qualify for the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: "The city's Inclusionary Housing ordinance helps to provide affordable housing in the City." Response: The City of Oakley does not have an Inclusionary Housing ordinance and disagrees with this finding.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

This recommendation has partially been implemented. The City's Planning Manager is in frequent communication with the affordable housing complexes location in the City. Information is also included on the City's website; however, we do not maintain data there such as waiting lists. Recommendation #7: The city should consider seeking federal, state, and local funding sources for affordable housing. Response: This recommendation has partially been implemented. The City does assist and coordinate with those interested in building affordable units by preparing letters of reference and recommendati...

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

This recommendation has partially been implemented. The City does assist and coordinate with those interested in building affordable units by preparing letters of reference and recommendation for these types of grants. Recommendation #8. The city should consider partnering with for-profit and not-for-profit builders to secure land suitable for affordable housing, and identify funding to do so. Response: This recommendation has partially been implemented. As previously stated, the City does assist and coordinate with those interested in building affordable units by preparing letters of r...

The only levees in the County that are independently evaluated for structural integrity are those in Reclamation Districts 800 and 2026, Holland and Byron.

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "Inclusionary Housing Ordinances sometimes include the option for the developer to pay in lieu fees instead of constructing affordable housing units." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

This recommendation has partially been implemented. As previously stated, the City does assist and coordinate with those interested in building affordable units by preparing letters of reference and recommendation for grants that may assist with these components of the projects. Recommendation #11: The city should consider undertaking an education initiative in the earliest phase of affordable planning projects in order to alleviate community concerns regarding affordable housing, and identifying funding to do so. Response: This recommendation has been implemented. The City works closely with ...

LAFCO’s MSR of the reclamation districts, which it performs every 5-years, focuses on financial and administrative management of the districts.

Response: Agree Score: +1

. "The city supplements the shortage of funds for affordable housing by requiring builders to pay impact fees, in lieu fees, or other construction and remodeling fees." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

F10

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

: "Infill costs less to service than new development because it takes advantage of the existing infrastructure." Response: The City of Oakley only partially agrees with this finding. It is true that infrastructure for new development on the fringe is more expensive to develop. It is also the case that, in contrast, urbanized areas of the city are within the service boundaries of utility and other service providers and adequate infrastructure components generally are in place. Although new development provides incremental improvements to the local utility services and pays fees for larger scale...

R11

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

This recommendation has been implemented. The City works closely with affordable 5 housing developers to notify and educate surrounding neighborhoods when developments are proposed and going through the entitlement process. Recommendation #13: The city should consider identifying all infill and vacant land not in PDAs and encourage use of it for affordable housing through tax incentives, density bonuses, etc. Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, based on the following explanation. The City of Oakley has an adopted and S...

F12

Response: Agree Score: +1

: "The city delegates to the builder, owner, or management company of affordable housing properties the responsibility for gathering and validating affordable housing clientele information, as well as maintaining lists of potentially interested buyers." Response: The City of Oakley agrees with this finding.

F13

Unpermitted encroachments can hinder visual inspection of the levee surface and create new structural weaknesses or potential conduits for seepage.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

R13

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, based on the following explanation. The City of Oakley has an adopted and State -certified Housing Element that identifies opportunity sites which are vacant or underdeveloped and already designated in the General Plan and zoning for appropriately scaled development that is sufficient to meet the RHNA allocation for the eight-year planning period. Recommendation #15. The city should consider creating an easily accessible, online central repository with all relevant information on deed-restricted housi...

City of Oakley

August 09, 2016 • 3 pages • 8 responses • Score: +6 (+6, 1, 0) View Details ▾

PDF

8 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Agree Score: +1

the East Bay area. Oakley agrees with Finding #1.

Loss (i.e. submersion) of any of the six islands in the Delta within Contra Costa County has potential to affect adversely much more than just Contra Costa County.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

partially agrees with Finding #2.

Response: Agree Score: +1

the Contra Costa Canal and EBMUD's Mokelumne aqueduct. Oakley agrees with Finding #3.

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

manner. It would actually be the City's Building Division that would interface with each applicant as described in the Recommendation, and the Building Division could certainly direct those applicants to a website or other information regarding levee safety. We do believe the reclamation districts are best positioned to prepare this information and to host it on the districts' websites. This recommendation will be implemented when the City is advised that such information has been prepared. The City of Oakley should consider following the Recommendation #11: precedent established by the East...

R11

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Again, we thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury's recent Report No. 1607. If you have any questions or need any assistance, please contact me directly at (925) 625-7025 or at montgomery@ci.oakley.ca.us. Respectfully submitted, sheiz Bryan H. Montgomery City Manager City Council CC:

F19

It takes nearly 2 years from the application date for reclamation districts to receive reimbursement for levee maintenance work approved by DWR under the Subventions Program.

Response: Agree Score: +1

agree nor disagree with Finding #19.

F20

Response: Agree Score: +1

can neither agree nor disagree. Finding #22: Planning agencies can require developers who seek to develop areas within reclamation districts to financially contribute to exiting levees as a condition of approval of their proposed developments, as was done with the East Cypress Corridor Plan for residential development in the interior of Hotchkiss Tract, Reclamation District 799. Oakley agrees with Finding #22, and the Oakley City Council Response: required this financial participation of developers through its approval of the East Cypress Corridor Specific Plan. CIVIL GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION...

F22

Response: Agree Score: +1

agrees with Finding #22, and the Oakley City Council Response: required this financial participation of developers through its approval of the East Cypress Corridor Specific Plan.

City of Oakley

August 09, 2016 • 4 pages • 10 responses • Score: 0 (+1, 7, -1) View Details ▾

PDF

10 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

not warranted. The City of Oakley believes that public safety agencies should not adopt their own CSEC protocols and submit them to the Contra Costa County Division of Children and Family Services (CFS) for approval. Rather, CFS should work with all countywide public safety agencies to adopt a uniform CSEC protocol that would be consistent across the County. The Board of Supervisors, City Councils, and Recommendation #9: Sheriff's Department should consider recommending that all first responders (usually law enforcement) refer suspected victims of CSEC to specialized and dedicated CSEC perso...

The Army Corp of Engineers inspects federal levees, as well as non-federal levees that qualify for the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

the CSEC Protocol because they have not yet seen it. Oakley partially disagrees with Finding #6.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

partially disagrees with Finding #7.

LAFCO’s MSR of the reclamation districts, which it performs every 5-years, focuses on financial and administrative management of the districts.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

the County assesses the appropriate health and social services to provide. Oakley partially disagrees with Finding #9.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

not warranted. While the recommendation may be an appropriate solution, the CSEC protocol should be determined at the County, not city level. Once a process has been identified, either within or outside of the CSEC 4 protocol, the City of Oakley will follow appropriate protocols for referring suspected victims of CSEC to other personnel. Recommendation #11: City Councils and Sheriff's Department should direct law enforcement to avail themselves of CSEC training programs formulated by CFS. This recommendation has been implemented. The Oakley Response: Police Department has and will cont...

F11

Response: Agree Score: +1

the County. Oakley agrees with Finding #11.

R11

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Police Department has and will continue to attend related training programs. Again, we thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury's recent Report No. 1605. If you have any questions or need any assistance, 625-7025 directly (925) please contact at me or at montgomery@ci.oakley.ca.us. Sincerely, men Bryan H. Montgomery City Manager City Council CC:

F12

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

the number of victims of CSEC and where they are located. Oakley partially disagrees with Finding #12.

F13

Unpermitted encroachments can hinder visual inspection of the levee surface and create new structural weaknesses or potential conduits for seepage.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

the best of a very difficult situation. Oakley partially disagrees with Finding #13.

F14

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

the victims of CSEC in a manner that is caring and trauma-informed. Oakley partially disagrees with Finding #14.

City of Oakley

∼ June 30, 2016 View Details ▾

PDF

LAFCO

July 19, 2016 • 2 pages • 3 responses • Score: 0 (+1, 1, -1) View Details ▾

PDF

3 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable. The power to create local governments and set their boundaries belongs to the California Legislature.

LAFCO’s MSR of the reclamation districts, which it performs every 5-years, focuses on financial and administrative management of the districts.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. In addition to reviewing financial and administrative issues, the LAFCO MSR includes information relating to growth and population; public facilities, public services, and infrastructure needs and deficiencies; opportunities for shared facilities; and accountability, governance structure and operational efficiencies.

F10

Response: Agree Score: +1

The respondent agrees with the finding.

Office of the Treasurer-Tax Collector

July 27, 2016 • 3 pages • 3 responses • Score: +2 (+2, 0, 0) View Details ▾

PDF

3 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Tax bills that have a situs address within the reclamation district may have a message printed in the Important Information to Taxpayer(s) section, directing owners where to go online to learn more about flood preparedness or levee safety precautions.

F16

Response: Agree Score: +1

The respondent agrees with the finding. F17. Explaining the hazards to levees by multiple means at appropriate times -- i.e., just before the start of storm season in the fall - can help to keep awareness at a heightened and effective level. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. F18. Efforts to educate and raise public awareness could be enhanced by crossdepartmental and/or cross-agency cooperation such as including Flood Control safety bulletins with other seasonally appropriate, apt-to-be-read or mandatory mailings such as property tax bills or voter information packets. Respo...

F17

Explaining the hazards to levees by multiple means at appropriate times -- i.e., just before the start of storm season in the fall – can help to keep awareness at a heightened and effective level.

Response: Agree Score: +1

The respondent agrees with the finding. F18. Efforts to educate and raise public awareness could be enhanced by crossdepartmental and/or cross-agency cooperation such as including Flood Control safety bulletins with other seasonally appropriate, apt-to-be-read or mandatory mailings such as property tax bills or voter information packets. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. RECOMMENDATIONS: R6. After identifying the necessary funding, the County Tax Collector should consider including informational material on flood preparedness or levee safety precautions, available...

No Responses Found 3

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

Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District Other

Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office

Contra Costa County County Clerk-Recorder Elected County Office