📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
⚠️ 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 2 findings
F3
Page 10
The Grand Jury finds that a comprehensive, feasible alternate Emergency Operations Center plan with multiple site options and activation instructions has not been developed.
F4
Page 10
The Grand Jury finds that a mock exercise to test the alternate plan and to teach participants what to do in the event of a loss of the primary Emergency Operations Center at Loma Ridge has not been held in over ten years. RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the 2013- 2014 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation of Orange County Emergency Operations in Orange County, the 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following three recommendations:
Recommendations 3
-
R1Page 10The Grand Jury recommends that an additional high-speed network connection to Loma Ridge be installed to provide Internet redundancy to mitigate risk of degraded communications. Consider installing a separate underground fiber optic cable feed to the Emergency Operations Center. (F.2.)
-
R2Page 10The Grand Jury recommends that a comprehensive, feasible alternate Emergency Operations Center plan be developed, with multiple site options and activation instructions. (F.3.)
-
R3Page 10The Grand Jury recommends that regularly scheduled exercise drills be held to test the alternate Emergency Operations Center backup plan and train all participants in the procedures to be followed in the event of loss of the primary Emergency Operations Center at Loma Ridge. (F.4.) REQUIRED RESPONSES The California Penal Code section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code section 933.05, subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), provides as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: Orange County Emergency Operations 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code section 933.05 are required from: Responses Required: