Santa Cruz County Grand Jury • 2024-2025 • Agency Response
Response to: Human Trafficking in Santa Cruz County Voices Unheard, Signs Unseen

Grand Jury Board of Supervisors Response to Grand Jury Report "Honoring Commitments to the Public..."

Published: September 10, 2024 17 pages
View Original PDF

Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F6

Findings and Recommendations 6 findings

F1 Page 5
The California Department of Pesticide Regulation is developing a new system of notification for agricultural pesticide applications statewide and the proof of concept shows promise of being a good solution for notifying the public of pesticide application information in a timely manner. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
No recommendations for this finding
F2 Page 6
The Active and Passive modes of notification will allow access to members of the public in a manner of their choosing. Some people are comfortable signing up for notifications, others are not and would prefer to look up the information anonymously. This appears to provide most people the option to choose the method with which they are most comfortable. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
No recommendations for this finding
F3 Page 7
Because project delays have put off the release of the new system until the Spring of 2025, rather than 2024 as originally proposed, it is even more important that the public be made aware of what the new system will provide to them. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): While it is agreed that it is important for the public to be made aware of DPR’s pesticide notification system, it needs to be recognized that DPR has been raising awareness of the system since beginning development on it in 2021/22, through public hearings, public comment periods, press releases, updates via their website, etc., and continues to do so. The notification system has been reported on by the media repeatedly, including over the recent weeks and months, with coverage occurring in multiple statewide newspapers and on some televised broadcasts. The State Board of Food and Agriculture itself (chaired by Agriculture Secretary Karen Ross) has held two separate public meetings on the notification system (in January and again in July of this year.)
No recommendations for this finding
F4 Page 8
As science progresses, less toxic pesticides are being developed and released regularly, and growers are finding acceptable alternatives to many pesticides. Less toxic pesticide use in Santa Cruz county is leading to lower risks to human and environmental health. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
No recommendations for this finding
F5 Page 9
Communication between the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office and other south county officials concerning pesticide management is not adequate, leading to a higher risk to human health. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Board is in disagreement with this finding. The Agricultural Commissioner’s Office has a long and consistent history of communicating with south county officials regarding the work we are involved in and potential interests or impacts with respect to county residents. While the office is not involved in “pesticide management” (which is the work of growers, licensed applicators, UC Cooperative Extension Farm Advisors, and licensed California Pest Control Advisors), it is directly involved in the regulatory aspects of pesticide use – both agricultural and non-agricultural – through permitting, pesticide use report review, monitoring and active use surveillance, pesticide use inspections, safety and pesticide storage audits, and fieldworker pesticide safety inspections. This work is broadly defined (through our contracting state agency, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, or DPR) as the Pesticide Use Enforcement (PUE) Program. Over the years, the Office has met and discussed matters of interest where our PUE Program is concerned with south county district supervisors, members of the Watsonville City Counsel, and State Assembly and Senate representatives. The facets of the PUE Program and the work involved are shared with county officials in the same manner as with county citizens and members of the community – the office responds to questions, concerns, or comments quickly and with all the relevant information that can be provided. Another direct example of consistent communications with south county officials is regular messaging with the Pajaro Valley Unified School District, particularly with respect to proposed applications of pre-plant soil fumigants that may take place within 1/4 mile of a school campus. The Agricultural Commissioner’s Office have been notifying and communicating with PVUSD for approximately two decades on field fumigant applications, and discussions related to agricultural pesticide use have included the district safety officer and superintendent of schools. Furthermore, there is regular communication with other agency officials serving the south county area, including but not limited to the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department, the Santa Cruz County Public Health Department, the Santa Cruz County Planning Department, and the Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District.
No recommendations for this finding
F7 Page 10
The joint effort between CAL Fire and OR3, as well as many other partners listed in the report, to improve preparedness for future wildfires is well- documented in the above-mentioned After-Action Report and Improvement Plan. Furthermore, the Grand Jury’s recommendation that this undertaking commence within 6 months of the Grand Jury report publication did take place in the allotted time period. However, the Grand Jury did not find the original report or any published updates to the initial report that included progress towards the report’s stated objectives. Such publications would reassure the public that wildfire preparedness is a priority and is being addressed. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): OR3 is coordinating with ALL fire agencies, and local jurisdictional partners on all hazard readiness and making improvements. OR3 produced a DRAFT Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan (OA EOP) in November 2023 but was subject to state review. OR3 will be bringing the final EOP to the Board for approval in September 2024. OR3 is also working to improve our alert and warning communication capacity with CruzAware and other tools like the NOAA weather radios. OR3 is currently working on a transportation Emergency Support function document with an evacuation annex, scheduled to be completed at the end of 2024.
No recommendations for this finding