Covid-19 The 2019-2020 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury is issuing its reports

Additional Recommendations 13

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

• R1

  Page 112
  Continue to be proactive in evaluating voting systems that are safe, efficient, and available. The County Clerk responded to R1 with a pledge of future implementation: ​ ​ As new systems become available, we will participate in evaluating them. After 2018 and the implementation of the Vote Center model in a few counties in California, Santa Cruz will need to determine if we want to pursue a Vote Center model or the current polling place model. The type of voting model will impact our voting system needs. We anticipate putting together a voter advisory group in 2018 to assist us as we evaluate our options.
• R2

  Page 112
  Once USB drives or other equipment have been connected to the County network, do not reattach to the offline vote counting systems. Published June 19, 2020 2019–2020 Consolidated Final Report 113 The County Clerk’s response affirmed that this recommendation already was implemented for future use: We have purchased additional USB drives and now have procedures in place to use a USB drive only once when taking data from our vote counting system and loading it onto the county network. Recommendation made to the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors:
• R3

  Page 113
  Identify and budget requisite funds for replacement of outdated election equipment once it has been certified (state certified, federally qualified). ​ ​ The Board of Supervisors responded to R3 with a pledge of future implementation, ​ ​ adding “The Board understands the need for election equipment upgrades.” 2020 Status Update: Were commitments fulfilled? In October 2019, the County Clerk’s Office visited the Grand Jury to explain the new voting system operation and discuss various aspects of the election cycle - a presentation similar to several offered to the public at large to acquaint them with the new system. More recently, answering the Grand Jury’s request for a 2020 status update, Respondents provided the following additional information on improvements to Santa Cruz County election equipment and procedures: ● Two federally qualified and state certified systems were offered to the County by the California Secretary of State.[23] [24] ​​ ​ ● A Decision Group was formed, consisting of members from County Counsel, General Services, and Voter Accessibility Advisory Committee.[25] ​ ● Formation of the Voter Advisory Group (originally planned for 2018) was delayed; the Elections Department plans to assemble the promised Citizen Advisory Group in 2021.[26] ​ ● Of the two systems approved by the Secretary of State, Dominion Voting Systems was chosen, based largely on the long-established relationship of trust with the vendor.[27] ​ ● A Staff Memo written by the County Clerk, and with approval recommended by County Administrative Officer, was presented to the Board of Supervisors at a regular public meeting on June 25, 2019.[28] ​ ● June 25, 2019 Minutes indicate that the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the voting system lease agreement.[29] [30] ​​ ​ ● Deciding to opt out of the Vote Center model, the Elections Department instead developed a hybrid model of traditional polling sites plus ten Voter Service centers - the hybrid system functioned smoothly and efficiently in the March primary election.[31] ​ ● Some modifications and refinements to this hybrid model are anticipated to further improve efficiency and accessibility for voters.[32] ​ Published June 19, 2020 114 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury In its update, the County Administrative Office (responding on behalf of the Board of Supervisors) simply confirmed that “New election equipment has been certified, leased, and deployed for use during the March 2020 Presidential Primary Election”,[33] providing ​ ​ a link to the Elections Department website “votescount.com” for more information.[34] ​ In conclusion, we find that three recommendations were made, and three responsive commitments were fulfilled. Based on the Decision Group evaluation of voting system options, the memo and presentation by the County Clerk, and the County Administrator’s recommendation, the Board of Supervisors approved the new contract and service agreement for the new voting system. The County Clerk completed all actions promised by immediately correcting a USB drive security vulnerability, and by evaluating available voting systems and efficiently transitioning to the updated system, successfully implementing its use in the Countywide primary election of March 2020. Report Title: Assessing the Threat of Violence in our Public Schools ​ ​ The 2016-17 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury investigated the readiness of our 10 public school districts, the County’s alternative education sites, and their respective law enforcement agencies to respond effectively to threats of targeted school violence. State law requires all public school districts and county offices of education to develop a comprehensive school safety plan. 2020 Status Update: Were Commitments Fulfilled? The Grand Jury reports and responses of 2016-2017 has been the primary source of information used to examine whether or not the respective agencies fulfilled their commitments to implement recommended actions.[35] In addition, a Santa Cruz County ​ ​ Grand Jury report was issued in 2018[36] to review and confirm the first step: the ​ ​ development and documentation of a comprehensive Countywide threat plan (‘The Plan’).[37] In that report, additional information about the Plan and the training was ​ ​ provided by the County Office of Education (COE). The 2018 investigation only looked at the COE and the Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office (CSO)’s compliance with their responses and the development of the threat assessment plan. It did not analyze or evaluate the agencies’ plans or preparations for physically securing school sites in a threat situation. This report takes that step. We reviewed the Offices of Education websites for publicly available information and documentation, and requested documentation from the boards and law enforcement agencies to confirm actions taken as outlined in the plans. Training materials were reviewed as well as training roster attendance. As one benchmark with which to compare, the similar report made by the San Diego County Grand Jury was reviewed for best practices and opportunities to further improve. Published June 19, 2020 2019–2020 Consolidated Final Report 115 In reviewing the 2019 report of the San Diego County Grand Jury ”School Safety in San Diego County - How Prepared Are We for Another Active School Shooting?”[38] we ​ ​ extract these key
• R4

  Page 120
  The BoS should allocate funds for a permanent budget for the SSP to function as mandated per SSP Policy and Procedures. 2016-17 response: BoS: Requires further analysis ​ ​ 2019-20 updated response: BoS: Has been implemented[61] ​ ​ ​ Notes: The BoS felt it was necessary to evaluate funding opportunities before committing in 2017. By February 2019, SSP was re-organized under the Communicable Diseases Unit of the Public Health Division (PHD) which allowed a new staffing structure for SSP.[62] It continues to explore ways to access and utilize state funds ​ ​ allocated to address the opioid crisis.
• R5

  Page 120
  The HSA should devote more time and resources to community outreach to promote rehabilitation and counselling of SSP clients. 2016-17 response: HSA and BoS: Has been implemented ​ ​ ​ ​ 2019-20 updated response: none provided. However, in the 2019 biennial report HSA recommended that SSP be incorporated into the Homeless Persons Health Project clinical field services.[63] ​ Published June 19, 2020 2019–2020 Consolidated Final Report 121
• R6

  Page 121
  The HSA should implement a mobile needle exchange unit to increase access to SSP services. 2016-17 responses: HSA and BoS: Requires further analysis ​ ​ ​ ​ 2019-20 updated responses: BoS: Requires further analysis[64] ​ ​ ​ HSA: On 6/11/2019 presented their biennial report to BoS and presented ​ ​ ​ recommended actions for Board direction in response to the Grand Jury report. In addition to the recommendation that SSP be incorporated into the Homeless Persons Health Project, HSA recommended a mobile exchange unit program to reach out to clients in the field.[65] SSP will return to BoS at a later date with a ​ ​ plan for review.
• R7

  Page 121
  The HSA should post hazardous waste signs with a single contact number for advice or reporting, available 24/7, in areas where syringes are commonly found. 2016-17 responses: BoS and HSA: Requires further analysis ​ ​ ​ ​ 2019-20 updated responses: BoS: Requires further analysis[66] ​ ​ ​ HSA: On 6/11/19, the BoS directed that the HSA collaborate with the California ​ Department of Public Health (CDPH) to complete a study of syringe litter. HSA to return with a proposed plan for a possible pilot program that could include using the County’s Citizen Connect mobile app to provide information about and reporting syringes. Further, HSA’s PHD is working with the CDPH office of AIDS to evaluate syringe disposal practices in the community, including where syringes are most commonly found. HSA will continue to explore ways to educate and inform the community.[67] ​
• R8

  Page 121
  The HSA should install and maintain Sharps containers in bathrooms in high needle-use public areas. 2016-17 responses: HSA and BoS: Requires further analysis ​ ​ ​ ​ 2019-20 updated responses: BoS: Will not be implemented[68] ​ ​ ​ HSA: As Sharps containers in public bathrooms have been vandalized, HSA is ​ focusing on placement of public kiosks in county & city jurisdictions. On 6/11/19, BoS directed the Board Chair to write a letter to local jurisdictions to work with them to install kiosks at HSA expense. HSA reached out to all local jurisdictions in the County to offer the installation and maintenance of public Sharps Containers and continues to work with partner jurisdictions to identify safe Published June 19, 2020 122 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury disposal sites. Also, the City of Santa Cruz formally offered willingness to coordinate with the County for placement of four additional disposal kiosks in the city.[69] ​
• R9

  Page 122
  The SSP should coordinate specific clean-up events throughout the county on a regular basis and report such efforts in their biennial and annual reports. 2016-17 responses: HSA and BoS: Requires further analysis ​ ​ ​ ​ 2019-20 updated responses: BoS: Will not be implemented[70] ​ ​ ​ HSA: The HSA is using models that include more frequent clean-up; partnering ​ with the County Department of Public Works, HSA provides $40,000 annually to Save Our Shores, Downtown Streets Team, and a private vendor for needle disposal as a part of these groups’ existing work. Also, HSA has a $10,000 contract with a private vendor for enhanced syringe clean-up focusing on the Emeline neighborhood. Once the results of the syringe litter study are analyzed (as described in R7), HSA will focus syringe disposal resources to the areas which data shows are most impacted by discarded needles. Disposal collection data will be included in future biennial reports.[71] ​ The HSA has continued to include the Grand Jury's "Sharper Solutions" recommendations in its monthly progress reports to the BoS , including as recently as December 10, 2019 (as of this writing). SSP has been directed to return to the BoS in June of 2020 with recommendations to improve syringe litter reporting and response.[72] ​ Report Title: Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District - The Bus Stops Here The 2016-2017 Grand Jury investigation led to 15 findings resulting in 16 separate recommendations. Responses were required from both the METRO Board of Directors (Board) and the METRO Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Overall, answers provided by the Board matched those given by its CEO. Explanations were required for partial or full disagreement with any finding, and for all responses to the recommendations. Of the 16 recommendations, METRO had stated that four “required further analysis”, while one recommendation “has not been implemented but will be implemented in the future”. 2020 Status Update - Were Commitments Fulfilled? In November 2019, the METRO CEO provided updates[73] to the 2017 report responses. ​ ​
• R10

  Page 123
  Metro should improve cleanliness at transit facilities.
• R11

  Page 123
  Metro should improve maintenance at transit facilities. 2017 response: CEO: requires further analysis. ​ 2019 updated response: Metro has made three significant accomplishments relative to these recommendations: ● In FY17, the METRO Board authorized one additional Custodial Service Worker. ● In compliance with the Federal Transit Administration’s requirement that all agencies receiving federal funds develop a Transit Asset Management Plan, METRO met the federal deadline and now has a plan in place that recognizes ● all assets valued at $50,000 or greater and establishes a remaining life for the asset and a Preventative Maintenance Program for the proper maintenance of the assets. Such a program now helps METRO regularly maintain the assets, facilitating the asset replacement program set forth in the Capital Improvement Plan. ● Over the past year METRO invested over $35,000 at Pacific Station remediating water damage and attempting to make the facility water-tight.
• R12

  Page 123
  Metro should establish overnight parking at the Scotts Valley Cavallero Transit Center for riders. 2017 response: CEO: Requires further analysis ​ ​ 2019 updated response: METRO has posted the Cavallero Transit Center with signs reflecting overnight parking by permit only. Paper permits can be obtained at the Pacific Station customer service booth at a cost of $5 per day. METRO is also investigating a smartphone application that could eventually replace the paper permits.
• R14

  Page 123
  METRO should use easily cleanable materials for bus seats. ​ 2017 response: CEO: Has not been implemented; will be implemented in future. ​ ​ Published June 19, 2020 124 updated response: Upon further investigation, METRO discovered that the ​​ problem has nothing to do with padded seats. Since the 2017 Grand Jury report, METRO has received five new Gillig buses and will receive four new zero emissions Porterra electric buses next year. All of these buses have been specified with a different seat insert which has an impermeable vinyl cover. The current Grand Jury commends the METRO CEO, staff, and Board for ongoing efforts to improve and modernize service delivery. Based on our review, METRO has been consistent in fulfilling the commitments made in response to the Grand Jury report. The CEO’s 2020 Spring Message[74] affirms METRO’s ongoing commitment to ​ ​ improving services. Further, the Grand Jury commends METRO for the implementation of smartphone apps for more efficient ticketing and the anticipated Summer 2020 rollout of Automatic Vehicle Location, which will dramatically improve rider experience.[75] Kudos also for ​ ​ ​ METRO’s excellent and comprehensive “Headways Bus Rider’s Guide,”[76] available in ​ ​ English, Spanish, Large Print, also online and via CRS (California Relay Service) for hearing/speech assist.