San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury
• 2006-2007
2006-2007 Final Report Responses San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury P.o. Box 4910 San Luis Obispo, California 93403
⚠️ 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.
Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F9, F10, F11, F14, F15, F16, F17
Findings and Recommendations 11 findings
F1
DIABLO CANYON: SAN LUIS OBISPO’S KATRINA?......................... 9 2. YOUR VOTE COUNTS – IT REALLY DOES.......................................25 3. SLO PUBLIC DEFENDERS .................................................................27 4. COUNTY CONTRACTS: DO WE GET WHAT WE PAY FOR?...........35 5. ELDER AND DEPENDENT ADULT ABUSE.......................................41 6 GETTING TO KNOW LAFCO................................................................43 7. SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT.........................45 8. AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY..............55 9. HISTORIC PRESERVATION................................................................57 10. CALIFORNIA VALLEY.......................................................................99 11. TRIBAL CONSULTATION – A PEACEFUL APPROACH...............109 13. LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.....................................123 PRISONS, JAILS & LOCAL LOCK-UPS INSPECTIONS: 14. REVIEW OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES...........................139 15. CALIFORNIA MEN’S COLONY.......................................................141 17. COUNTY JAIL ..................................................................................145 18. JUVENILE HALL – JUVENILE SERVICES CENTER .....................151 19. LOCAL LOCK-UPS..........................................................................157 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-5 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-6 INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-7 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-8 1. DIABLO CANYON: SAN LUIS OBISPO’S KATRINA? FINDINGS 1. Because of their proximity, residents of Avila Beach are understandably most concerned about limited emergency evacuation routes. . The county has been successful in working cooperatively with the private property owner of the Avila Beach Resort and Golf Course. For residents on the south side of Avila Beach, the Cave Landing to Bluff Drive route, originally considered as a possible exit, seems like an obvious alternative. The existing dirt road should be upgraded and designated as another alternative evacuation route from Avila Beach.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Emergency responders repeatedly stress the need for all residents to be self-sufficient for at least 72 hours. As one Emergency Services Coordinator put it, “Planning starts at the individual level and moves out from there.” However there is limited information about what people need to do to prepare to be self-sufficient.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
The very successful meeting on emergency planning for people with special needs was specifically for providers in licensed county facilities. It did not include special needs residents who are living on their own with family or professional assistance.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Liquid potassium iodide especially prepared for infants and children, the most vulnerable population to radiation, is not readily available. The information in the AT&T telephone book about potassium iodide is insufficient and outdated. Currently the State of California does not stock liquid KI. 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-9 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Office of Emergency Services should work with private owners San Miguelito Partners to explore the addition of Cave Landing to Bluff Drive as an alternative emergency exit from Avila Beach. (Finding 1) 2. Information about self-sufficiency, how to prepare a 72 hour emergency kit, and how to obtain potassium iodide as an individual should be developed and mailed directly to county households annually. As part of this mailing, information about CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) should also be included. This could be included in the annual Disabled Registration card mailer or sent as a separate mailer to all county residents. (Finding 2) 3. Using the Disabled Registration cards, OES should organize meetings with independent special needs residents and their caretakers to discuss emergency response and self- sufficiency. (Finding 3) 4. An information sheet about potassium iodide should be prepared for distribution to county obstetricians and pediatricians. OES should review all information in the AT&T telephone book headed “Nuclear Emergency Information” for currency, accuracy and clarity. Particular attention should be paid to the section on potassium iodide. (Finding 4) 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-10 REQUIRED RESPONSES 1. San Luis Obispo County Office of Emergency Services: Due (All Findings and Recommendations) 2. San Luis Obispo County Health Officer: Due (Findings and Recommendations 3 & 4) 3. San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors: Due (All Findings and Recommendations) 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-11 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-12 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-13 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-14 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-15 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-16 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-17 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-18 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-19 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-20 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-21 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-22 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-23 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-24 2. YOUR VOTE COUNTS – IT REALLY DOES FINDINGS 1. The pre-election procedures for ensuring that optical scanners accurately counted our votes were followed to the letter. The back-up routines employed by the Clerk- Recorder’s office to ensure against any loss of voting data meet the highest standards. The computer security policies in place precluded the possibility of hacking into, altering, or modifying any data in the system. Please see Appendix A for a detailed description of that process.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The procedures for gathering, processing, verifying and publishing the results of balloting on Election Day worked to perfection. The staff at the County Clerk-Recorder’s office made it looks simple as well. Please see Appendix E for a detailed description of that process. 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-25 6. The quality control procedures used for safeguarding and storing ballots and other critical items after the election have been designed to offer both security of these items and an audit trail should any questions arise within 22 months of the election. Please see Appendix F for a description of that process.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Board Meetings include subjects not within the purview of the CVCSD, e.g., Emergency Preparedness, Parks and Recreation and Social Function.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The rumor regarding posting of balloting information was proven to be false.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
The November, 2006, countywide election cost the taxpayers about $570,000. NO RESPONSES REQUIRED 2006-2007 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report Responses Page: R-26 3. SLO PUBLIC DEFENDERS FINDINGS 1. Based upon the Grand Jury’s interviews with two sub-contracting public defenders, a partner from the firm of Maguire & Ashbaugh, and the presiding judge, we believe the county’s public defender contract with the law firm of Maguire & Ashbaugh is serving the needs of San Luis Obispo County well.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
VECTOR CONTROL - AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION FINDING Mosquito abatement is not state funded, with only a benefit assessment from each county supporting the program. The San Luis Obispo County MAP covers the fourth largest service area in the state (3,326 square miles) with only three full-time technicians, and a budget that ranks 48th out of 61 funded MAP programs in the State of California. In 2005-6, the San Luis Obispo County MAP received $230,893, compared with an average of $1,907,000 for the other 60 programs. Occasional grants from the state’s Mosquito Abatement Program have been instrumental in controlling WNV in San Luis Obispo County by allowing technicians to treat more sources more thoroughly and with better larvicides.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION FINDINGS 1. Great harm has come to the community because of the secrecy surrounding the closed session of the Lucia Mar Unified School District Board of Education held February 20, 2007, and actions taken thereafter.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
JUVENILE HALL – JUVENILE SERVICES CENTER FINDINGS 1. The population of minors residing at Juvenile Hall often exceeds capacity. There have been repeated requests for funding to increase the capacity of the Hall. The first phase of expansion is underway and will provide necessary infrastructure for expanding the number of beds. Expansion of the existing physical plant is a prerequisite to expansion of services.
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 4
-
CL1GETTING TO KNOW LAFCO
-
CL2SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT
-
CL3HISTORIC PRESERVATION PRESERVING THE PAST TO ENRICH THE FUTURE
-
CL4THE EL PASO DE ROBLES YOUTH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Commendations 1
-
CM1It is apparent from observation of and conversation with all those involved in the operation of Juvenile Hall and with the youth who are in their care, that staff are doing their absolute best to provide a safe, secure and nurturing environment for the youth who are housed there. This is being accomplished despite having to operate in extremely overcrowded facilities where 'making do' is a way of life. The Grand Jury commends the staff of Juvenile Hall for their creativity, their positive attitude and for their successes. (Finding #2)