City of Napa

R1

The City Council should instruct the Napa Building Department to take specific steps to promote better customer relations. Response: The Building Division agrees in part with Finding 1. We are aware of some dissatisfaction within the community. However, based upon the numerous positive customer service questionnaire cards and comments that we continually receive, we do not agree that the dissatisfaction is widespread. - In response to Recommendation 1, we have assigned staff to personally contact the commenting individual if we receive any negative customer service questionnaire comment cards. Also, in an effort to promote better customer relations, an annual Building Division Open House will be established. This will be an opportunity for anyone involved in the construction community to sit down with Staff, discuss the operations of the Division and enjoy some informal exchange of HASBIPROJECTS\Grand Jury 2002\Grand Jury 2001-02 Response.doc ideas. Emphasis will be placed on the fact that everyone should have the same goal, to build a good product that meets minimum code standards. It always takes a team effort to build a good product and each one has a role in that team effort, including the Building Division.

R2

Professionals in the building community should take classes offered by the Building Division to learn about updated Building Codes. Response: We agree with Finding 2, that the dissatisfaction is based upon the fact that the . Building Division changed its procedures to more rigorously enforce the building codes. However, the Building Division changed its procedures in order to comply with law. In 1995, the Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors approved Policy Resolution 95-01. This resolution required professional registration for any plan checking position responsible for reviewing the work of other licensed professionals (architects or professional engineers). Prior to Policy Resolution 95-01, the City of Napa Building Division performed plan review with building inspectors, not licensed professionals. This was common for many smaller jurisdictions. In order to comply with this new requirement, the City utilized the services of a consulting engineering firm to review the plans submitted by licensed professionals. Subsequently, the City of Napa established the Position of Plan Check Engineer and hired a licensed engineer in January 1996. , Consequently, plans submitted by licensed professionals prior to 1995 were not reviewed and scrutinized to the level they are today. In this regard, the Building Division has changed its procedure to more rigorously enforce the building codes. Additionally, building codes are constantly amended. Every three years there are new building codes adopted and mandated by the State of California. These codes become more and more stringent after calamities such as the Northridge earthquake in Southern California. For example, because of new technology learned following this destructive earthquake, all previous structural and seismic provisions were changed with the adoption of the 1998 California Building Code. These were major changes in the way structures could be designed. Each City Building Inspector, the Plan Check Engineer and the Chief Building Official have taken update courses to gain knowledge of these new code provisions. Each aforementioned employee is certified through the International Conference of Building Officials, ICBO, in the building codes. As such, each is required to take exams and re-certify every three years. This process insures that each employee has the required knowledge to perform competent plan review and/or inspection services. Therefore, Building Division Staff is more knowledgeable today than in years past. In this regard, the Building Division is more rigorously enforcing the building codes because the employees have more training and knowledge of the codes.

R3

None. Response: We concur with Finding 3, in their last interview with me, the Grand Jury Committee explained that the Building Division was performing its duties in an appropriate manner. As they commended me and shook my hand, they further encouraged me by saying, “Keep up the good work.” That comment was appreciated very much. However, we know there is always room for improvement and the City of Napa is committed to that goal. Recently, the City of Napa hired a consulting firm, MAXIMUS, to perform a study and analysis of the City’s Private Development Review process, which includes the plan review and inspection services provided by the Building Division. The City’s goal is to ascertain if the City can make any improvements to its management practices of providing more efficient and responsive service to the public. A final report will be provided which will include a detailed summary of the analysis performed in the study and a plan of implementation for recommended improvements. The City will review the report and decide which recommendations to implement in order to improve the Private Development Review process. M. Bruce Gunn, Chief Building Official, respectfully submits these responses for your review and acceptance. HASB\PROJECTS\Grand Jury 2002\Grand Jury 2001-02 Response.doc HASB\PROJECTS\Grand Jury 2002\Grand Jury 2001-02 Response.doc Response to 2001-02 Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations: City of Napa Code Enforcement

R4

A new site needs to be located for the winter shelter prior to the onset of inclement weather in 2002. The appropriate city/county agencies should set aside sufficient funds to qualify for state/federal matching funds. Response: The Napa City Council supports the provision of a winter shelter, but needs to point out that implementation of Recommendation 4 will require further analysis by the lead governmental agency, Napa County Health and Human Services, which is responsible for the shelter program and identification of an adequate site and funding. The City of Napa will continue to participate with other appropriate agencies in analyzing this recommendation and identifying an appropriate alternative site for this purpose.

R5

The money expended for temporary lodging of homeless individuals and families might be better spent on the expansion of existing facilities and the lease/purchase of more permanent facilities. Napa County should explore the possibility of site control either through long-term leases or real estate acquisition. Response: The Napa City Council does not have any oversight responsibilities regarding the expenditure of the identified General Assistance funds and, therefore, cannot comment on whether or not to implement the Grand Jury recommendation regarding the reallocation of these funds to another priority.

R6

Many homeless individuals refusing shelter or treatment still require assistance in obtaining basic food and clothing needs. However, if their lifestyle choice includes criminal activities, our community should be protected from these individuals. County services should be designed to help support their basic needs while also providing for the safety and rights of the rest of our community. Response: This recommendation is directed at "County services" over which the City of Napa has no responsibility or oversight. However, the Police Department is an active partner in the multi-agency homeless task force including outreach activities to the street homeless. We regularly conduct sweeps of encampments looking for illegal activity, wanted persons, parolees, probationers and sex offenders, while encouraging the street homeless to access available services to change their lifestyle. | The Police Department believes that the permanent solution to the street homeless problem is not more services or more cops but rather a change in State law regarding the treatment of the mentally ill and habitually intoxicated. Until that happens, the Police Department will continue to use the tools and resources at its disposal to ensure the public's safety as best we can.

R7

Health and Human Services should ensure that at least one employee has sufficient training and experience in grant-writing to be able to assist the various members of the Continuum of Care in order to facilitate the receipt of additional grant monies to fund the necessary projects. Response: The Napa City Council does not have any oversight responsibilities regarding Health and Human Services and, therefore, cannot comment on whether or not to implement the Grand Jury recommendation regarding providing additional training to their staff on grant writing skills related to homeless activities. However, the City of Napa is supportive of this recommendation, and has already implemented it relative to Napa Housing Authority staff involved in the Continuum of Care process. The City will continue to identify opportunities for additional training to improve our competitiveness for state and federal grants to fund priority homeless projects and programs.

R8

County and City agencies should undertake an investigation into the possibility of setting aside some public land where the homeless could legally park their vehicles overnight, together with the provision of rudimentary services such as bathroom facilities. Response: The Police Department strongly disagrees with this recommendation. Such a location would present a serious public health and public safety threat to the community. We believe that it would become a haven for criminals, drug and alcohol use and sales, prostitution, and fights. It would generate garbage, raw sewage, and trash that would all have to be cleaned up by the City. Any location of such a "no-man's land" would surely generate a neighborhood outcry. Finally, we believe that for the City to provide such a location with those kinds of services would further enable the street homeless to maintain this dangerous, unhealthy, and destructive lifestyle with no incentive to access services. Housing Authority Executive Director Peter Dreier and Police Chief Dan Monez respectfully submit these responses for your review and acceptance. HASB\PROJECTS\Grand Jury 2002\Grand Jury 2001-02 Response.doc