Wildfire Risk Mitigation in Lake County

Recommendations 9

• R1

  Page 274
  Led by CAL FIRE, the State of California must engage in collaborative landscape-level forest management for long-term forest resiliency. This planning process should include stakeholders at all levels of government, Native American tribes, scientists, environmental and environmental justice groups, private industry representatives and local residents. Because forest health impacts Californians in urban and coastal areas, efforts should be made to include representatives from non-forested regions to elevate the importance of California’s forests to the entire state’s wellbeing. Leaders also should review existing forestry practices and procedures, including the state’s Forest Practice Rules, to assess whether they facilitate forest resiliency in a changing climate. • Over time, funding gradually should be shifted from reacting to the consequences of poor forest management to preventative treatments that promote forest health and resilience. This should include spreading the costs among a greater array of beneficiaries of healthy forests statewide. • State agencies should plan to make greater use of the Good Neighbor Authority to perform treatments on federal land • State leaders should continue to remind federal lawmakers and policymakers of federal obligations to its forests within California. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 274
• R2

  Page 275
  On CAL FIRE funds that have time constraints for encumbrance and liquidation, the Department of Finance should allow longer timelines to facilitate collaborative large-scale forest management planning.
• R3

  Page 275
  The State of California should lead a policy shift from fire suppression to using fire as a tool. • This should include creating dedicated prescribed fire crews. These job classifications should be designed to attract the state’s top talent, with pay comparable to non-prescribed fire crews.
• R4

  Page 275
  Treating the land at the scale outlined in the draft Forest Carbon Plan will require more resources. CAL FIRE, local air districts and other affected agencies should develop a list of potions they will need to meet the draft Forest Carbon Plan goals of treating 500,000 acres of nonfederal land per year, 500,000 acres of USDA Forest Service land per year and 10,000 to 15,000 acres of acres of Bureau of Land Management land per year. State agencies should assume that at least part of the federal lands acreage treated will be by state entities working under the Good Neighbor Authority, and predict their staffing needs accordingly. The Legislature should then fund these extra positions, including the positions at the local level. • As more funding ñ such as the jump from $40 million to more than $200 million in Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds between FY 2016-17 and 2017-18 ñ is allocated for forest management to CAL FIRE and other agencies, these entities must be responsible for properly planning for its use, including an adequate number of staff with necessary skills. If new positions are necessary, CAL FIRE and other agencies and departments should not be penalized for developing the resources needed to successfully administer the forest management program.
• R5

  Page 275
  The California Air Resources Board, land managers and other stakeholders should continue to actively work to find ways to increase prescribed burning through better use of technology, including modeling software, traditional portable air quality monitoring and new low- cost sensor monitoring. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 275 • State agencies and other stakeholders should continue to participate to the extent possible in the Fire MOU and Air, Land and Water meetings, as well as other collaborative cross-jurisdictional efforts to overcome the barriers to prescribed fire. Pertinent agencies that currently do not participate in these efforts should participate.
• R6

  Page 276
  The State of California should encourage the development of additional infrastructure to utilize material removed from the forests as part of long-term forest management. • The California Natural Resources Agency, along with members of the steering committee and the interagency leads for each recommendation, should report back to the Commission on the implementation of the SB 859 working group’s recommendations. • The state should issue grants to small communities so they can develop infrastructure according to their needs. • The state should develop a statewide biomass policy that takes into account the needs of different parts of the state. All stakeholder communities, including environmental justice, should provide input into this policy. • Part of this plan should explore the potential of biomass near forested communities with newer, cleaner facilities vis-a-vis the economies of scale provided by larger facilities. • Additionally, this should include research on the public benefits provided by biomass energy within the context of the Renewables Portfolio Standard policy of “least cost best fit,” and whether those benefits qualify biomass energy as the best in certain situations. Further, analysis of public benefits should give consideration to whether biomass should receive subsidies to lower costs in certain cases, particularly in facilities developed or retrofitted with cleaner technology. • Recommendation 7: To better educate Californians about the suite of benefits healthy forests provide to the state, the state should consider the following: 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 276 • The state should invest in a long-term forest health campaign similar to Save our Water by contracting with an organization that can use its expertise to raise public awareness of forest health issues. A high-ranking person within the Governor’s Administration - preferably the Governor - must champion this effort. Outreach messages should be based on research. • The Legislature should fund extensive statewide public outreach campaigns for CAL FIRE to continue to educate the public on the benefits of healthy forests and prescribed fire. • The California Natural Resources Agency should work with the Department of Education to catalog existing educational resources on resilient forests, the history of fire in California’s ecological development and from where pupils’ water originates to allow teachers to easily access and incorporate the information into their curricula. Additionally, the California Natural Resources Agency should advertise this collection to teachers to spread awareness of these resources. • The California Natural Resources Agency should collaborate with state colleges and universities offering forestry programs to increase awareness of forest health concerns in their communities, to both educate the public and increase enrollment • In these programs. Forestry technical advisors affiliated with universities should be consulted on where they are encountering educational gaps to help identify where efforts should be targeted. • Water districts should play a greater role in educating their customers on the sources of their water. To facilitate this, the state should provide funding for an organization to create educational toolkits that water agencies easily can customize. • The state should provide grant funding for an educational organization to bring lawmakers, policymakers and their staff to forests to teach them about the benefits provided by forests, the consequences of forest neglect and the different forest treatment outcomes. The organization should work closely with the Legislature and other appropriate bodies to overcome logistical hurdles. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 277 • Californians’ knowledge levels and attitudes toward forest health should be measured at the onset of educational campaigns, and policymakers should set clear goals for the changes they would like to see in those attributes. These should be measured throughout the campaigns, with course corrections designed as necessary if the state does not meet its outcomes. • Recommendation 8: The Tree Mortality Task Force should evolve into a forest management planning entity, with dedicated funding. • It should help set a strategic direction for forest management, identify measureable goals, decide how to track results and recommend course corrections to better achieve those goals. • It should advise on how to incorporate technology in assessing and improving forest health. • This should include reviewing the planning process and developing recommendations on where streamlining can occur.
• R7

  Page 268
  That consideration be given to creating a single County-wide Fire Safe Council to offer consistent messaging and provide more widespread wildfire risk mitigation information. (F-9) 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 268
• R8

  Page 269
  That the Board of Supervisors publicly account for the remaining Riviera mitigation assessment funds that targeted properties with high fire risk in 2018-2019. (F-10) RESPONSES In response to Penal Code § 933 (c), the following Responses are required: Board of Supervisors (R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-7, R-8) 90 days Lake County Community Development Department (R-7) 90 days The following responses are requested: CAL FIRE (R-6) …………………………………………… 90 days South Lake County Fire Safe Council (R-7) …………………90 days 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 269 Bibliography Little Hoover Commission: Fire on the Mountain: Rethinking Forest Management in the Sierra Nevada. Report # 242. February 2018. Lake County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. February 2018. National Fire Protection Assoc.: Outthinkng Wildfire. A call to end the destruction of communities by wildfire. 2020. Cal Fire: General Plan Safety Element Assessment. June 2020. Cal Fire: Sonoma-Lake-Napa Unit 2020 Strategic Fire Plan. Cal Fire: Sonoma-Lake-Napa Unit 2021 Strategic Fire Plan. International Fire Chiefs’ Assoc: Wildland-Urban Interface. Chief’s Guide. 2nd Edition, undated. Clark, SA, et al., for the Karuk Tribe: Good Fire. Current barriers to the expansion of cultural burning. Prescribed fire in California and recommended solutions, undated. Bay Area Council Economic Institute: The true cost of wildfires. Analyzing the impact of wildfires on the California economy. 2021. Pacific Gas & Electric: 2011 Wildfire Mitigation Plan Update. February 25, 2022. Seigler Springs Community Redevelopment Association: Living with Wildfire in Lake County California. 2022. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 270 Exhibit 1 Fire on the Mountain: Rethinking Forest Management in the Sierra Nevada Overview In this report, the Commission calls for transformational culture change in its forest management practices. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported in December 2017 that approximately 27 million trees had died statewide on federal, state and private lands since November 2016. The tally brought to 129 million the number of trees that have died in California forests during years of drought and bark beetle infestations since 2010. During its review, the Commission found that California’s forests suffer from neglect and mismanagement, resulting in overcrowding that leaves them susceptible to disease, insects and wildfire. The Commission found commitment to long-lasting forest management changes at the highest levels of government, but that support for those changes needs to spread down not just through the state’s massive bureaucracy and law- and policymaking apparatuses, but among the general public as well. Complicating the management problem is the fact that the State of California owns very few of the forests within its borders – most are owned by the federal government or private landowners. Among the Commission’s nine recommendations, it urges the state to take a greater leadership role in collaborative forest management planning at the watershed level. The Good Neighbor Authority granted in the 2014 Farm Bill provides a mechanism for the state to conduct restoration activities on federal land, but state agencies must have the financial and personnel resources to perform this work. As part of this collaborative effort, it calls upon the state to use more prescribed fire to reinvigorate forests, inhibit firestorms and help protect air and water quality. Central to these efforts must be a statewide public education campaign to help Californians understand why healthy forests matter to them, and elicit buy-in for the much-needed forest treatments. California’s forests are reaching a breaking point. Poor management policies that interrupted the natural and historical cycle of fire, combined now with a changing climate, have left forests vulnerable to disease, insects, catastrophic 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 271 fire and drought. If the state does not take appropriate action soon, Californians risk losing the priceless benefits provided by forests. One forest supervisor told the Commission that management decisions made during the next five to 10 years will determine the forests’ condition in 100 to 200 years. The Commission is encouraged that state leaders recognize the need for decisive action to restore California’s forests to resiliency. But much work is needed to change a culture focused almost solely on emergency firefighting to one that supports long-term forest restoration and management. Prioritizing forest management for the long run - for the healthier, less overgrown forests that enhance watersheds and wildlife, reduce the scale of catastrophic wild- fires and better withstand the scourges of bark beetles and a warming climate - will require more money and staff. The Commission typically does not recommend increasing financial and human resources to fix problems, but here it recognizes the savings that ultimately will result from such investment. Today, California spends all too much for the immediate, emergency consequences of its long-neglected forests. Massive landscapes once sustained by beneficial, low-intensity wild fires are overrun with fire- intolerant trees and thick carpets of forest fuels that can turn even the smallest camp re or sparking power line into a raging firestorm. Property damage and firefighting costs for local, state and federal governments run into the billions of dollars annually. Property damage for the wild fires in October 2017 alone exceeded $9 billion dollars, and the state spent approximately $700 million fighting fires between July 2017 and mid-January 2018.After devastating fires, local water districts pay millions more to remove tons of eroded soils from mountain reservoirs that supply downstream customers. Now state government has invested millions of dollars responding to the horrific damage of bark beetles and the tree mortality crisis in the Sierra Nevada; when CAL FIRE testified before the Commission in January 2017, only 15 months following Governor Brown’s declaration of a State of Emergency for tree mortality, it already had allocated more than 80,000 hours of staff time and $43.6 million dollars solely to responding to the crisis. Local governments and private landowners also are spending heavily to remove hazard trees as a result of the tree mortality crisis. The costs of long neglecting and mismanaging forests have become an unsustainable burden in California. The new investments the Commission recommends are intended to drive a strategy 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 272 in which the state pays more for front-end forest management, and eventually, pays less reacting to crises and disasters. The Commission’s findings and recommendations (listed in full at the end of this section) fall into five categories: § Increasing Pace and Scale of Forest Restoration through Collaboration. Speeding up and expanding treatments to restore forests to good health demands greater teamwork between state government and the federal government, which owns nearly 60 percent of the forest land in California. California has authority to conduct forest restoration work on federal land through the Good Neighbor Authority authorized in the 2014 Farm Bill. Success will depend on joint government plans and work at the ecosystem and watershed level. § Creating a Culture where Fire is a Tool, not a Threat. California’s forests evolved with fire and were shaped by fire. Though the increasing number of homes built in or near forests means re cannot feasibly be returned to the forest everywhere, prescribed fire, where possible, should be used to treat forests. Prescribed fires work in calm conditions that prevent fire from burning out of control and limit smoke and carbon emissions § Developing a Long-Term Plan for Forest Materials. Appropriate management will result in trees being removed from the forest. When possible, this wood should generate income for forest management. The state already is working to boost demand, within state government and externally, for California forest products, particularly from smaller-diameter trees that historically have had little value. Bioenergy from forest biomass is another op on for smaller-diameter wood. The Commission heard important arguments for and against forest bioenergy. As the Commission monitors state efforts to maximize demand for removed wood, it would like the state to develop a long-term bioenergy plan - one that clearly delineates the state’s position on bioenergy and mitigates the effects of using or rejecting it. § Educating Californians on Forest Resiliency. Californians are woefully uneducated on the importance of healthy forests and the benefits they provide. The state should invest in a large-scale outreach and education campaign to inform the public about the ecological importance of forests and the necessity for prescribed burns to bring about a lasting culture change in how the state 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 273 views and treats its forests. Fortunately, a model already exists in California in how the state has approached drought education. § Planning for the Long Term and Ensuring Accountability. Formalizing a multijurisdictional planning process will be necessary to undertake the long- term work of restoring California’s forests. Here, too, the state has a successful model in the Tree Mortality Task Force. A scaled-down version of this task force could be used as a steering committee for the larger forest restoration effort. Ensuring accountability for goals stated in the state’s Forest Carbon Plan also will be critical in successfully managing the forests of California. The Commission recommends regular reporting on progress toward these goals, and may hold future hearings on the topic. Little Hoover Commission Recommendations on Forest Management Recommendation 1: Led by CAL FIRE, the State of California must engage in collaborative landscape-level forest management for long-term forest resiliency. This planning process should include stakeholders at all levels of government, Native American tribes, scientists, environmental and environmental justice groups, private industry representatives and local residents. Because forest health impacts Californians in urban and coastal areas, efforts should be made to include representatives from non-forested regions to elevate the importance of California’s forests to the entire state’s wellbeing. Leaders also should review existing forestry practices and procedures, including the state’s Forest Practice Rules, to assess whether they facilitate forest resiliency in a changing climate. • Over time, funding gradually should be shifted from reacting to the consequences of poor forest management to preventative treatments that promote forest health and resilience. This should include spreading the costs among a greater array of beneficiaries of healthy forests statewide. • State agencies should plan to make greater use of the Good Neighbor Authority to perform treatments on federal land • State leaders should continue to remind federal lawmakers and policymakers of federal obligations to its forests within California. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 274 Recommendation 2: On CAL FIRE funds that have time constraints for encumbrance and liquidation, the Department of Finance should allow longer timelines to facilitate collaborative large-scale forest management planning. Recommendation 3: The State of California should lead a policy shift from fire suppression to using fire as a tool. • This should include creating dedicated prescribed fire crews. These job classifications should be designed to attract the state’s top talent, with pay comparable to non-prescribed fire crews. Recommendation 4: Treating the land at the scale outlined in the draft Forest Carbon Plan will require more resources. CAL FIRE, local air districts and other affected agencies should develop a list of potions they will need to meet the draft Forest Carbon Plan goals of treating 500,000 acres of nonfederal land per year, 500,000 acres of USDA Forest Service land per year and 10,000 to 15,000 acres of acres of Bureau of Land Management land per year. State agencies should assume that at least part of the federal lands acreage treated will be by state entities working under the Good Neighbor Authority, and predict their staffing needs accordingly. The Legislature should then fund these extra positions, including the positions at the local level. • As more funding ñ such as the jump from $40 million to more than $200 million in Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds between FY 2016-17 and 2017-18 ñ is allocated for forest management to CAL FIRE and other agencies, these entities must be responsible for properly planning for its use, including an adequate number of staff with necessary skills. If new positions are necessary, CAL FIRE and other agencies and departments should not be penalized for developing the resources needed to successfully administer the forest management program. Recommendation 5: The California Air Resources Board, land managers and other stakeholders should continue to actively work to find ways to increase prescribed burning through better use of technology, including modeling software, traditional portable air quality monitoring and new low- cost sensor monitoring. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 275 • State agencies and other stakeholders should continue to participate to the extent possible in the Fire MOU and Air, Land and Water meetings, as well as other collaborative cross-jurisdictional efforts to overcome the barriers to prescribed fire. Pertinent agencies that currently do not participate in these efforts should participate. Recommendation 6: The State of California should encourage the development of additional infrastructure to utilize material removed from the forests as part of long-term forest management. • The California Natural Resources Agency, along with members of the steering committee and the interagency leads for each recommendation, should report back to the Commission on the implementation of the SB 859 working group’s recommendations. • The state should issue grants to small communities so they can develop infrastructure according to their needs. • The state should develop a statewide biomass policy that takes into account the needs of different parts of the state. All stakeholder communities, including environmental justice, should provide input into this policy. • Part of this plan should explore the potential of biomass near forested communities with newer, cleaner facilities vis-a-vis the economies of scale provided by larger facilities. • Additionally, this should include research on the public benefits provided by biomass energy within the context of the Renewables Portfolio Standard policy of “least cost best fit,” and whether those benefits qualify biomass energy as the best in certain situations. Further, analysis of public benefits should give consideration to whether biomass should receive subsidies to lower costs in certain cases, particularly in facilities developed or retrofitted with cleaner technology. • Recommendation 7: To better educate Californians about the suite of benefits healthy forests provide to the state, the state should consider the following: 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 276 • The state should invest in a long-term forest health campaign similar to Save our Water by contracting with an organization that can use its expertise to raise public awareness of forest health issues. A high-ranking person within the Governor’s Administration - preferably the Governor - must champion this effort. Outreach messages should be based on research. • The Legislature should fund extensive statewide public outreach campaigns for CAL FIRE to continue to educate the public on the benefits of healthy forests and prescribed fire. • The California Natural Resources Agency should work with the Department of Education to catalog existing educational resources on resilient forests, the history of fire in California’s ecological development and from where pupils’ water originates to allow teachers to easily access and incorporate the information into their curricula. Additionally, the California Natural Resources Agency should advertise this collection to teachers to spread awareness of these resources. • The California Natural Resources Agency should collaborate with state colleges and universities offering forestry programs to increase awareness of forest health concerns in their communities, to both educate the public and increase enrollment • In these programs. Forestry technical advisors affiliated with universities should be consulted on where they are encountering educational gaps to help identify where efforts should be targeted. • Water districts should play a greater role in educating their customers on the sources of their water. To facilitate this, the state should provide funding for an organization to create educational toolkits that water agencies easily can customize. • The state should provide grant funding for an educational organization to bring lawmakers, policymakers and their staff to forests to teach them about the benefits provided by forests, the consequences of forest neglect and the different forest treatment outcomes. The organization should work closely with the Legislature and other appropriate bodies to overcome logistical hurdles. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 277 • Californians’ knowledge levels and attitudes toward forest health should be measured at the onset of educational campaigns, and policymakers should set clear goals for the changes they would like to see in those attributes. These should be measured throughout the campaigns, with course corrections designed as necessary if the state does not meet its outcomes. • Recommendation 8: The Tree Mortality Task Force should evolve into a forest management planning entity, with dedicated funding. • It should help set a strategic direction for forest management, identify measureable goals, decide how to track results and recommend course corrections to better achieve those goals. • It should advise on how to incorporate technology in assessing and improving forest health. • This should include reviewing the planning process and developing recommendations on where streamlining can occur. Recommendation 9: The California Natural Resources Agency, its relevant departments and the California Environmental Protection Agency should regularly report to the Legislature and post online progress on the metrics listed in the Forest Carbon Plan, as well as the steps it is taking to begin implementing the plan. The Commission may hold a follow-up hearing on these steps as well as the progress made on its recommendations. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 278 Exhibit 2 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 279 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 280 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 281 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 282 Exhibit 3 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 283 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 284 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 285 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 286 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 287 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 288 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 289 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 290 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 291 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 292 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 293 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 294 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 295 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 296 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 297 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 298 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 299 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 300 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 301 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 302 Exhibit 4 Lake County - Aligning to Action Healing the Land, Healing the People Prepared by the Community Mitigation Assistance Team - May 27, 2021 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Large wildfires over the past six years, which scorched thousands of acres and resulted in the loss of several thousand homes, served as wake-up call to the residents and land managers in Lake County. In 2019, talk about bringing in a Community Mitigation Assistance Team (CMAT) began. Those same fires, as well as the pandemic in 2020, delayed the Team’s start but both the community and the CMAT recognized the need and finally made it happen, albeit virtually. The County has many things going for it - numerous Firewise USA® Communities working to increase mitigation with their neighborhoods; strong relationships between CAL Fire and the local fire departments; adoption of both the Wildland Urban Interface Code and Buildings Codes; a partnership between the Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians, Robinson Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians, USFS, BLM, and New Paradigm College formed a non- 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 303 profit, the Tribal EcoRestoration Alliance (TERA) to create a training program for Tribal members to increase the mitigation workforce in the County. In 2018, the County adopted a Hazardous Vegetation Abatement Ordinance, though implementation has been slowed by the pandemic. Though efforts were underway, mitigation leaders, residents, organizations, and governmental agencies recognized that they often didn’t know who was doing what and that their efforts had minimal cohesive focus. Amazing work and partnerships were flourishing with some groups and in some areas of the County but not at the level everyone felt was needed. Lake County and the Mendocino National Forest requested a CMAT to enhance Lake County’s collaborative efforts and evaluate their wildfire mitigation strategy, including relevant plans, programs, and activities. They also requested CMAT develop priorities, clarify roles and responsibilities of involved parties, and provide them with an actionable plan to implement. This report summarizes the CMAT’s findings and provides recommendations that incorporate wildfire mitigation best practices to support the further development of collaborative efforts and increase mitigation actions across Lake County, California. This CMAT assignment was conducted virtually due to travel and in-person gathering restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Team Members undertook an extensive review of existing mitigation resources and documents, followed by hosting an intensive SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) exercise with active members of the mitigation community, and followed up with numerous individual and small group dialogues which enhanced the CMAT’s understanding of the situation. An additional interactive workshop focused on learning about successful mitigation efforts from CMAT members. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The report captures findings and provides actionable recommendations to increase public participation in mitigation activities and enhance the overall effectiveness of Lake County’s strategies and tactics. The Mitigation Guiding Principles are overarching best practices gleaned from numerous successful practitioners and should be used to guide all partner’s mitigation and 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 304 engagement efforts. The Team’s findings and recommendations fall into two categories, Collaboration and Mitigation. CMAT has created an online Community Toolbox (link) that contains research and reference documents related to the specific recommendations provided in this report. GUIDING PRINCIPLES Consider these guiding principles when developing your Lake County wildfire mitigation strategy and the projects that comprise it; they will make your efforts more effective. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 305 Work together -A group of people who share the same goals can get more done together than separately. They plan together, piggyback on strengths, share resources, staff, and the work. A partnership is more likely to get supporting funding. Collaboratively planning, implementing, sharing successes and lessons learned is an essential first step in building a common vision and gaining broad community support. Be strategic - Be strategic by creating larger landscape fuel treatments and helping clusters of homes reduce risk but realize this takes time. Incremental actions, (one home / one acre), is progress! No boundaries - Wildfires do not stop at jurisdictional boundaries. Link fuel reduction and defensible space projects to benefit cross-boundary areas. Engage with other neighborhoods and other jurisdictions to accomplish work on adjoining properties. Promote home hardening and defensible space -Having homeowners prepare their yard and structure for wildfire is the most important thing they can do to avoid loss and is always where work should begin. Help underserved populations - Provide mitigation assistance for low-income, elderly, and disabled residents who may be unable to accomplish this work on their own. Face-to-face engagement - Sharing with residents is best done face-to-face through a home assessment and conversations about actions they must take. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 306 Often this discussion has to take place many times before someone takes action. Stretch project funds - Homeowner contributions should be part of the funding equation, but expectations for investment vary by community and homeowner. When and where appropriate, require an investment of labor, time, or financial resources. This investment empowers the homeowner to take responsibility for what’s theirs and makes them more likely to maintain their project over time. Think creatively to meet unfunded needs - Always engage local and regional partners that have something to lose or gain; these individuals and businesses may have financial resources to contribute. Even when a grant received does not have a match requirement, consider asking for some percent (5-10%) of the sub award amount from the homeowner group or resident that could be used to help increase the overall value of the project or program. Funds could be used to: Assist with coordination or administrative costs, provide support for the underserved or chipping programs, or conducting fuel reduction assessments. Invest most of your time and resources on risk reduction actions - Meetings, recognition programs, news releases, or going to events do not accomplish mitigation. Respect everyone’s time. Do not hold additional meetings if wildfire mitigation discussions can be consolidated into existing forums. Make meetings short and strategic. Ensure tasks and initiatives are clear at the end of each meeting and are moving the partnership forward. Celebrate success! - Sustained participation in any partnership will require frequent communication and recognition of everyone’s contributions. Recognition does not have to be formal and can be as simple as a handwritten thank you. Recognition in the presence of peers and partners goes a long way toward retaining volunteers. Share accomplishments through media, presentations, yard signage, or site visits to build momentum for mitigation work. Stories, especially those from the perspective of the property owner, often have the biggest impact. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 307 INTRODUCTION Located in the west-central portion of northern California, Lake County lies midway between the Pacific Ocean and the Sacramento Valley. Clear Lake, the oldest and largest lake in California, sits in at the center of the County, surrounded by burned and unburned ridges. The diverse topography of Lake County ranges from level valleys and rolling hills to rugged mountains. Public lands comprise just over half of the County’s acreage. The area experiences warm, dry summers and cool winters with moderate precipitation. Lake County is home to seven Tribal Nations, and as of 2018, had a population of 64,382. Recreation and tourism make up a significant sector of the County’s economy along with vineyards, pear, and walnut orchards. Mining and timber harvesting are a minor component of the economy. Wildfires have impacted the majority of Lake County, resulting in numerous homes lost and almost every resident being evacuated at least once. Since 2015, three of California’s largest wildfires have occurred in and adjacent to Lake County, including the Valley Fire (2015), Ranch Fire (2018), and August Complex (2020), renewing the community’s interest in wildfire mitigation. Planning efforts have been extensive. A revision of the 2009 Community Wildfire Protection Plan is currently underway and is expected to be approved in late June. Both the County of Lake and the cities of Lakeport and Clearlake have current Natural Hazard Mitigation Plans. The Tribal Nations developed a Multi-Tribal Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, the first in the nation, that has been approved by FEMA. The County has also formally adopted the Wildland Urban Interface Code as well as the 2008 Building Code. In 2018, they adopted a Hazardous Vegetation Abatement Ordinance. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 308 In 2017, the County formalized the Risk Reduction Authority, which under a Joint Powers Authority (JPA), is responsible for a wide variety of programs and projects for all hazards COLLABORATION Lake County, California has a multitude of resources focused on all phases of wildfire. Individual neighbors, groups, organizations, agencies, and governments are arranged in formal (with authority) and informal (without perceived authority) working groups. Some organizations have a clear chain of command and hierarchy in place for decision making and action, while others have little oversight and decision-making accountability. The County is geographically large and demographically diverse. Because of this, programs do not always cover the entire land area or populations. To frame this section of the findings and recommendations, CMAT focuses on the activities of: 1. County-wide organizations: Risk Reduction Authority, Fire Safe Councils 2. Individual organizations (Partners) which provide mitigation services within Lake County. County-wide organizations, such as the Risk Reduction Authority (RRA) and Lake County Fire Safe Council (LCFSC) act as convening bodies for the individual organizations and have a vital role to play in fostering collaborative mitigation. There are several individual organizations with independent and autonomous governing oversight bodies that invest in the community, provide resources, and add to the overall mitigation ecosystem. Their inclusion in this section is intended to highlight the value they bring and the opportunities that may be enhanced. If an organization was not included, this was not intended to reduce their value, rather it is because they did not fit within the context of the analysis or we did not directly interact with them. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 309 CMAT compiled a Lake County Partners List to be used as a template (link). The Collaborative - Developing a Common Direction A well-defined structure of an organization allows participants to easily understand the flow of information, how decisions are reached, expectations, and where to go for assistance. In the fire response world, the hierarchy is known as the Incident Command System. This structure focuses on accountability, action planning, unity of command, personal responsibility, span of control, and resource tracking. In this section we highlight the current structure and strongly suggest some changes. 1. Finding - Work occurs in organizational silos and while some good work is getting done, often it is not being completed together. Three organizations appear to carry a great deal of responsibility and there is no clear definition of which organization is responsible for which activity. a. The Risk Reduction Authority (RRA), under the Joint Powers Authority (JPA), is responsible for a wide variety of programs and projects for all hazards. These include: i. Development of low- or no-cost resources to reduce the risks of fire from hazardous vegetation, earthquakes, and environmental causes. ii. Development of community infrastructure improvements. iii. Development of property inspection programs with scoring and assessment tools to prioritize the level of individual and community risk. iv. Development and management of funding sources necessary to the Authority's risk reduction programs. v. Development of educational and training tools to assist Authority members, the public and non-member 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 310 governmental agencies in discovering, assessing, reducing the risks associated with fire and other disasters, and mitigating potential impacts. vi. Development of community programs to improve the resilience of our local forested areas. vii. Enforcement of County, State, and Federal laws. b. The Lake County Fire Safe Council is currently a stand-alone organization, staffed by one individual. c. The vision of the Lake County Fire Safe Council is to foster a fire adapted county developed through ongoing public education, training, community collaboration, and is responsible for a wide variety of programs and projects. These include: i. Implementing the Lake County CWPP and supervising the re-write of the document. (The CWPP process by its very nature is collaborative. Collaboration is not the current process.) ii. Empowering Lake County residents and businesses with the information, knowledge, and support to protect their families and properties from wildfire. d. The South Lake Fire Safe Council (SLFSC) has taken responsibility for coordinating wildfire mitigation efforts within the boundaries of the South Lake Fire District since the early 2000s. They are incorporated as a501(c)(3) with a volunteer Board of Directors and no staff. 2. Finding - Due to the extensive responsibility placed on the Risk Reduction Authority (RRA) it is evident that they need to delegate responsibility to other partners. Recommendations: a. Agree upon and formally designate one entity to pull the entire group together. b. The Risk Reduction Authority (RRA) will serve as the bridge to provide high level direction and support to the overall goals and objectives of wildfire risk reduction activities throughout the entire county (amongst other RRA duties.) c. Fire Safe Councils will act as the convening body for partners in wildfire mitigation work and must develop working groups to focus on specific tasks. The working groups should include, at a minimum: 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 311 i. Implementation ii. Communications - Outreach, Education and Training iii. Science and Monitoring d. The role of the Fire Safe Council will be multi-pronged and include the following: i. Community liaisons to local organizations and citizens ii. Education, outreach iii. Implementation of a consistent communication strategy iv. Source for available resources and programs v. Grant clearinghouse (sharing, informing, and assisting with grant applications) vi. See
• R9

  Page 278
  The California Natural Resources Agency, its relevant departments and the California Environmental Protection Agency should regularly report to the Legislature and post online progress on the metrics listed in the Forest Carbon Plan, as well as the steps it is taking to begin implementing the plan. The Commission may hold a follow-up hearing on these steps as well as the progress made on its recommendations. 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 278 Exhibit 2 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 279 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 280 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 281 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 282 Exhibit 3 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 283 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 284 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 285 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 286 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 287 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 288 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 289 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 290 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 291 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 292 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 293 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 294 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 295 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 296 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 297 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 298 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 299 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 300 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 301 2021-2022 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Page | 302 Exhibit 4 Lake County - Aligning to Action Healing the Land, Healing the People Prepared by the Community Mitigation Assistance Team - May 27, 2021