Grand Jury 19-20 Grand Jury Report Responses 1 message

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 may services to the community. Funding is available through different grant opportunities to assist with fuel reduction and the County has benefited from such grants. An example of such grant funding is the fuel reduction project that was approved as part of the 35-statewide project as outline in Governor Newsom’s 45-day report and the Executive Order 1.8.19-EO-N-05-19 that was issued regarding fuel reduction in California. This project is in the unincorporated area of the County within CSA 48 area of Aptos Creek and Buzzard Lagoon roads near Corralitos. The project consisted of treating 225 acres to improve existing and create additional fuel breaks to protect vulnerable communities. Of the 225 treated acres, 150 acres is a shaded fuel break and has allowed for the use of prescribed fire to be used to help clear and maintain the area.

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. AGREE x PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Responsibility for wildlife fire management is held with each fire agency within Santa Cruz County. Each jurisdiction monitors and tracks wildfire risk within its own jurisdiction. The approach and extent of this work is managed within each jurisdiction. The State responsibility area, which includes the majority of the rural area within the County, is controlled and managed by CAL FIRE.

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 worked with PG&E to identify the locations of high-risk electrical equipment in the county and will continue to engage with PG&E to identify high-risk electrical equipment.

Most of Santa Cruz County in addition to the City of Santa Cruz with its large eucalyptus groves are not being monitored by the ALERTWildfire Imaging Surveillance system and would be well served by the installation of cameras capable of monitoring coastal areas occupied by eucalyptus groves in areas harboring potential sources of ignition. AGREE x PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Eucalyptus groves are a problem in general due to the abundant fuel loading they provide, but one fuel type in the county should not be singled out. Fires occur in areas of redwood forest as well, example, the Rincon Fire in 2018. The use of the ALERTWildfire camera system is a great way to provide for early confirmation of wildfire in the county. CAL FIRE/County Fire is working with ALERTWildfire and PG&E to determine locations to install cameras to provide a system for early confirmation of wildfires.

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):

Residents living in the CSA-48 receive a lower level of emergency medical support than those living in more urban areas where ALS is provided. AGREE x PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Grand Jury report identifies (Pg 35) that there are 11 fire agencies that provide ALS services in the county, that is incorrect, there is only 5 fire agencies providing ALS (Santa Cruz City FD, Scotts Valley FPD, Central FPD, Aptos FPD and Watsonville FD). The remainder of the fire agencies provide BLS with advanced/expanded scope medical services that allow BLS agencies to perform intubation, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP), Pulse oximetry, Administer Narcan and Epinephrine (Epipen).

Santa Cruz County Fire, through its contract with CAL FIRE, has not been meeting the “two in, two out" requirement, reducing their ability to respond effectively and quickly to individuals or structures needing attention in a fire emergency. Proposition 218 was proposed and passed to be able to satisfy the “two in, two out” requirement, without a clear commitment by County Fire that that standard will be consistently met in all CSA-48 locations. In addition, no analysis was presented to quantify the effect on response time. 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 Long-Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) have proven too been 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 even during evacuations use conventional methods such as reverse 911 or CodeRed alerts. The cost to purchase these systems is very high as well as the maintenance.

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 PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion x DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The vulnerability of the community is more directly related to the located and preventative maintenance of the home and surrounding site and less so related to published information regarding refuge and assembly areas. All communities refuge and assembly areas are commonly churches and schools and dependent on specific emergencies within the County.

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 PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion x DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The decision to evacuate should always be based on the health and safety of the residents.

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 PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion x DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The evacuation routes utilized during an emergency must remain flexible to appropriately response to the emergency at hand.

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):

Santa Cruz County residents, and especially those living in District 5, would benefit if the 2019 San Lorenzo Evacuation Study performed by KLD Engineering was made available on a County agency web site and publicized. x AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

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): Sustaining public interest and engagement in emergency preparation is a difficult and ongoing task that is never complete. Local fire agencies engage in outreach and education activities to encourage residents to be prepared for emergencies.

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. 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 role in the effort but funding is the single most difficult obstacles to overcome. The second obstacle is obtaining property owner permissions or buy-in on fuel reduction can be 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. AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion x DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The County Fire/CAL FIRE Chief gave a State of the State presentation to the Board during Budget Hearings, which provided both data and analysis of resources, response times, code enforcement, inspection, and education. This is aligned with the budget process. This presentation is also given to the Fire Dept Advisory commission (FDAC), holds responsibility to provide oversite of these.

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. x AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

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 2016 LAFCO Municipal Service Review of Fire Districts report and its 2006 predecessor do not adequately address district performance in the areas of Fire Risk Reduction (specifically: inspections, vegetation management, and education). 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 prison inmate workforce is a State level program administered by the California Department of Corrections. The incarcerated inmates are not a budgetary item for the County to measure since it is a state level program. Any reference to the analysis of the program should be included as part of the CAL FIRE report.

Due to the inconsistent reporting of response times provided by CAL FIRE in Proposition 218, conflict with information supplied by document request to the Grand Jury, and due to lack of performance standards for response times, voters may have been ill-informed when voting on the proposition. AGREE x PARTIALLY DISAGREE – explain the disputed portion DISAGREE – explain why Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Not having the specific details of the finding or having the opportunity to address any conflicts, it is difficult to provide a response to the finding. The area County Fire provides services to is approximately 266 square miles and has remote area that the public frequently visit and have emergencies that take longer to responded to. County Fire is working to clarify the data to ensure it is accurate.