Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
2019-2020
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (8)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
30 findings
F1:
The Santa Cruz City Schools Comprehensive School Safety Plans provide a best practice and is a useful resource for parents and the public.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F2:
The Naval Postgraduate School’s Center for Homeland Defense and Security provides an excellent resource for school administration with its K-12 school shooting database.
Related Recommendations (2)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R19:
The Board of Supervisors should require the CAO to appoint a county Risk Manager, by December 31, 2020. The Risk Manager should report to the CAO, who will be responsible for ongoing identification, analysis, quantification, and remediation planning of all fire risks across the County. This role should be considered as a service to all four cities in the County as well. (F2, F3, F24)
F3:
The Pajaro Valley Unified School District can improve its oversight and communications by following the The California League of Bond Oversight Committees (CaLBOC) Best Practices document on School Bond Oversight Committee Operations Standards.
Related Recommendations (3)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R19:
The Board of Supervisors should require the CAO to appoint a county Risk Manager, by December 31, 2020. The Risk Manager should report to the CAO, who will be responsible for ongoing identification, analysis, quantification, and remediation planning of all fire risks across the County. This role should be considered as a service to all four cities in the County as well. (F2, F3, F24)
R22:
The Santa Cruz County Administrative Office should develop and sign a Memorandum of Understanding between the County and PG&E, to require that PG&E share and update quarterly the location of their aging and high risk equipment. This should include coverage of the four cities in the County and should be done by December 31, 2020. (F3)
F4:
City employees do not feel supported and protected by the City Manager and Human Resources.
Related Recommendations (2)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R23:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should invest in an ALERTWildfire Imaging Surveillance system. Cameras should be purchased, installed, and tested to achieve full coverage of the County by the beginning of the 2021 fire season. (F4)
F5:
There are disagreements and a lack of transparency on how the City Council meeting agendas are set.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F6:
Failures to amend City Council Policy 6.9 resulted in a lack of comprehensive guidelines to address interactions between City Council and City Staff.
Related Recommendations (3)
R13:
The City Council should re-establish a working group to update the Council Policy 6.9, to more clearly define interactions between City Council and City Staff when making requests, and should do so by December 31, 2020. (F6)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R25:
The County Board of Supervisors should explain to the public why the Proposition 218 information on response times is inconsistent with the response time data available from County Fire by December 31, 2020. (F6, F8, F30)
F7:
Lack of a well-defined social media policy leads to confusion about the appropriate use of social media.
Related Recommendations (2)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R16:
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should request the Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer investigate and report on the viability of converting the underutilized County Juvenile Hall campus, located at 3650 Graham Hill Rd, Felton, CA into a facility focused on fulfilling crucial homeless, mental health and substance abuse needs by December 31, 2020. (F7)
F8:
The public has lost confidence in the City Leadership’s ability to function effectively.
Related Recommendations (2)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R25:
The County Board of Supervisors should explain to the public why the Proposition 218 information on response times is inconsistent with the response time data available from County Fire by December 31, 2020. (F6, F8, F30)
F9:
The Assistant City Manager and City Manager do not manage to key performance indicators and measures of success.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F10:
The designation of a City Council position as part-time, with insufficient compensation, may limit the candidate pool and negatively affect City Council performance.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F11:
The City does not have an elected mayor position which limits the ability of voters to assign accountability when City government is dysfunctional and ineffective. Published June 25, 2020 192 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (2)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R21:
County emergency planners at all levels should provide notification of evacuation routes and/or shelter-in-place options by March 31, 2021. Notification plans should be provided for when power is out and dissemination of information by wireless or internet is difficult or impossible. (F11, F14, F15, F17, F18, F27)
F12:
Lack of a formal intern policy for Councilmembers has caused confusion, disruption and a burden on City Staff.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F13:
Lack of trust among City Councilmembers impedes constructive discourse and decision making.
Related Recommendations (3)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R18:
Santa Cruz County should create a 24-hour mobile crisis response unit that includes medical staff and an experienced crisis worker to respond to emergency 911 calls and non-emergency police calls that do not involve legal issues or threats of violence. The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should work with the County’s law enforcement agencies to identify funds in their budgets that could be allocated to this program. The Grand Jury recommends the County consider using CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets) in Eugene, Oregon as a model. (F13)
R20:
The County Office of Emergency Services should inventory, designate, and publish locations by December 31, 2020 for assembly and refuge in high risk communities, designating shelter in place locations in case of threatening wildfire when evacuation from the area might not be possible. (F13–F15, F27)
F14:
The Conflict Resolution Center (CRC) contract lacks performance criteria, making it difficult to determine whether conflict resolution was successful. The CRC engagement also failed to address conflicts between City Council and City Staff.
Related Recommendations (3)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R20:
The County Office of Emergency Services should inventory, designate, and publish locations by December 31, 2020 for assembly and refuge in high risk communities, designating shelter in place locations in case of threatening wildfire when evacuation from the area might not be possible. (F13–F15, F27)
R21:
County emergency planners at all levels should provide notification of evacuation routes and/or shelter-in-place options by March 31, 2021. Notification plans should be provided for when power is out and dissemination of information by wireless or internet is difficult or impossible. (F11, F14, F15, F17, F18, F27)
F15:
Major conflicts and dysfunctions were recognized by City Staff, City Council, and the public in February 2019, but there was a failure to seek remediation for those conflicts until October 2019.
Related Recommendations (4)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R20:
The County Office of Emergency Services should inventory, designate, and publish locations by December 31, 2020 for assembly and refuge in high risk communities, designating shelter in place locations in case of threatening wildfire when evacuation from the area might not be possible. (F13–F15, F27)
R21:
County emergency planners at all levels should provide notification of evacuation routes and/or shelter-in-place options by March 31, 2021. Notification plans should be provided for when power is out and dissemination of information by wireless or internet is difficult or impossible. (F11, F14, F15, F17, F18, F27)
R24:
The County Board of Supervisors should update regulations to require evacuation routes be kept clear for fire prevention, not just for line of sight, but also for access by fire engines and other emergency equipment by the beginning of the 2021 fire season. (F15–F18, F27) Published July 3, 2020 61 of 97 382 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F16:
Without a current, detailed strategic plan, the City Staff and City Council goals and objectives are unclear.
Related Recommendations (2)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R24:
The County Board of Supervisors should update regulations to require evacuation routes be kept clear for fire prevention, not just for line of sight, but also for access by fire engines and other emergency equipment by the beginning of the 2021 fire season. (F15–F18, F27) Published July 3, 2020 61 of 97 382 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F17:
Poor performance and antagonism at City Hall resulted in lost opportunities and could impair the City's ability to raise money.
Related Recommendations (3)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R21:
County emergency planners at all levels should provide notification of evacuation routes and/or shelter-in-place options by March 31, 2021. Notification plans should be provided for when power is out and dissemination of information by wireless or internet is difficult or impossible. (F11, F14, F15, F17, F18, F27)
R24:
The County Board of Supervisors should update regulations to require evacuation routes be kept clear for fire prevention, not just for line of sight, but also for access by fire engines and other emergency equipment by the beginning of the 2021 fire season. (F15–F18, F27) Published July 3, 2020 61 of 97 382 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F18:
The City Council’s inability to control disruptive behavior during meetings increases meeting length and inhibits a representative cross-section of the public from participating.
Related Recommendations (3)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
R21:
County emergency planners at all levels should provide notification of evacuation routes and/or shelter-in-place options by March 31, 2021. Notification plans should be provided for when power is out and dissemination of information by wireless or internet is difficult or impossible. (F11, F14, F15, F17, F18, F27)
R24:
The County Board of Supervisors should update regulations to require evacuation routes be kept clear for fire prevention, not just for line of sight, but also for access by fire engines and other emergency equipment by the beginning of the 2021 fire season. (F15–F18, F27) Published July 3, 2020 61 of 97 382 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F19:
The employee engagement survey methodology is flawed, and may not accurately represent employee sentiment. The survey does not have the ability to present results per City department and thus the interpretation of results and
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F20:
There are tools available, such as Santa Clara County’s “Silicon Valley Triage Tool," that could be applied to Santa Cruz County to allow the County to better understand the true cost of homelessness enabling the County to use public resources more efficiently.
F21:
If underutilized parcels of land throughout Santa Cruz County were identified, such as the area near Coral Street in Santa Cruz, and the parcel adjacent to the County Government Mental Health Building in Watsonville, these parcels could potentially be used to increase the number of beds and services to support the homeless.
Related Recommendations (1)
R17:
By December 31, 2020, Santa Cruz County Planning Department should evaluate whether using the parcel of land adjacent to the County Mental Health Building to provide more temporary or permanent housing for the homeless would be a viable option, and report the results to the Board of Supervisors by December 31, 2020. (F21) Published June 30, 2020 284 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F22:
The information provided in the ADU section of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department’s website is not user friendly, and therefore not as encouraging as it could be to homeowners looking to build much needed housing for the County. Published June 30, 2020 282 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F23:
No single organization in the County is assuming a leadership role in Fire Hazard Mitigation. It is not clear whose responsibility it is to minimize this County wide risk.
F24:
The annual report to the County Board of Supervisors and the County Administrative Office by County Fire/CAL FIRE does not provide data or analysis of resources, response times, code enforcement, inspection, or education. This information is necessary to show what gaps exist between current performance and community needs in order for informed budget decisions to be made. Without adequate background information, the Board of Supervisors is unable to hold CAL FIRE accountable for the specific responsibilities specified in their contract.
Related Recommendations (1)
R19:
The Board of Supervisors should require the CAO to appoint a county Risk Manager, by December 31, 2020. The Risk Manager should report to the CAO, who will be responsible for ongoing identification, analysis, quantification, and remediation planning of all fire risks across the County. This role should be considered as a service to all four cities in the County as well. (F2, F3, F24)
F25:
The four fire protection districts in the San Lorenzo Valley would benefit by further aligning their policies and procedures in anticipation of future consolidation. Published July 3, 2020 58 of 97 2019–2020 Consolidated Final Report 379
F26:
Reporting data, statistics, and formats utilized by fire agencies throughout the County are highly inconsistent, uncoordinated, and therefore not readily evaluated and compared. The standard Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating system would be useful to adopt. Response time data are not well described or consistently reported by the jurisdictions, making accurate assessment difficult, especially by other agencies or by the public.
F27:
The 2015 County of Santa Cruz Emergency Operations Management plan does not adequately address evacuation, and references data too outdated to be useful, such as a population density map from the 2000 census.
Related Recommendations (3)
R20:
The County Office of Emergency Services should inventory, designate, and publish locations by December 31, 2020 for assembly and refuge in high risk communities, designating shelter in place locations in case of threatening wildfire when evacuation from the area might not be possible. (F13–F15, F27)
R21:
County emergency planners at all levels should provide notification of evacuation routes and/or shelter-in-place options by March 31, 2021. Notification plans should be provided for when power is out and dissemination of information by wireless or internet is difficult or impossible. (F11, F14, F15, F17, F18, F27)
R24:
The County Board of Supervisors should update regulations to require evacuation routes be kept clear for fire prevention, not just for line of sight, but also for access by fire engines and other emergency equipment by the beginning of the 2021 fire season. (F15–F18, F27) Published July 3, 2020 61 of 97 382 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F28:
The 2016 LAFCO Municipal Service Review of Fire Districts report and its 2006 predecessor do not adequately address district performance in the areas of Fire Risk Reduction (specifically: inspections, vegetation management, and education).
F29:
The Grand Jury finds that formally specified baseline and target performance statements, in alignment with the Center for Public Safety Excellence Assessment Process, neither currently exist nor are they reported by fire departments in the County as required by best practice standards. There are no goals set or measures made of progress for review by the Board of Supervisors regarding County Fire/CAL FIRE performance. Other fire districts in the County are similarly remiss in reporting to their governing bodies. Appropriate goals would include progress on response times, vegetation management, and code inspection progress, all of which are necessary to properly quantify the budget and resources required for full-time, volunteer, and prison inmate workforces, in appropriate, affordable proportions.
F30:
Due to the inconsistent reporting of response times provided by CAL FIRE in Proposition 218, conflict with information supplied by document request to the Grand Jury, and due to lack of performance standards for response times, voters may have been ill-informed when voting on the proposition.
Related Recommendations (1)
R25:
The County Board of Supervisors should explain to the public why the Proposition 218 information on response times is inconsistent with the response time data available from County Fire by December 31, 2020. (F6, F8, F30)
Additional Recommendations
13
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
Metro should improve cleanliness at transit facilities.
R11:
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:
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:
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.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
County and City website information is sometimes missing, out-of-date, and inaccurate; links may be broken. Thus, many city and county departments aren't updating their websites often enough to keep citizens informed.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. (F1, F2, F5)
R2:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a protocol to be exercised quarterly, beginning January 2021, which requires department heads to confirm via documentation (initial a spreadsheet, for example) that they have verified the accuracy of their department's web information (F1, F2, F3)
F2:
County and City administrations lack a process to review content accuracy and currency and thereby assure timely correction and revision of content.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. (F1, F2, F5)
R2:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a protocol to be exercised quarterly, beginning January 2021, which requires department heads to confirm via documentation (initial a spreadsheet, for example) that they have verified the accuracy of their department's web information (F1, F2, F3)
F3:
County and City goals for website redesign or quality improvement are not sufficiently “SMART”: Specific + Measurable + Attainable + Relevant + Time-Bound.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a protocol to be exercised quarterly, beginning January 2021, which requires department heads to confirm via documentation (initial a spreadsheet, for example) that they have verified the accuracy of their department's web information (F1, F2, F3)
R3:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish ‘SMART’ goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021. (F3, F4, F5)
F4:
The County does not have a notification system by which users can be alerted to updated web content. The County's website would be enhanced by the addition of a site-wide notification system.
Related Recommendations (3)
R3:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish ‘SMART’ goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021. (F3, F4, F5)
R4:
County ISD should provide a notification system similar to the city of Santa Cruz by June 2021 whereby users receive email or text messages when updated web information is available. (F4) Published June 16, 2020 12 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R5:
The City of Santa Cruz City Manager should perform a lessons learned activity and then update the City’s relevant policies and operating procedures to avoid a future repeat of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s restaurant/lodge shutdown and renovation no later than second quarter 2021. (F4)
F5:
County and City website content providers do not provide an explanation in content for incorrect or out-of-date information, even though they appear to know the reasons.
Related Recommendations (3)
R1:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. (F1, F2, F5)
R3:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish ‘SMART’ goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021. (F3, F4, F5)
R6:
The City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department and the City of Santa Cruz City Manager should add a formal process to the Operation Plan by addressing needed capital improvements, maintenance schedules, facility inspections, water use, variable pricing, charitable policies, operations review, and basic stakeholder roles and responsibilities. Stakeholders include the Santa Cruz City Council, the City’s Parks and Recreation Department, the City’s Parks & Recreation Commission, the Operator, the DeLaveaga Golf Course Superintendent, the City’s Building Department and the City’s Public Works Department. (F5)
F6:
The DeLaveaga Golf Course website is not up to date and should include all current information regarding costs to various players and groups such as discounted youth green fees.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The City of Santa Cruz’s Parks and Recreation Department should validate that delaveagagolf.com includes youth pricing and current information regarding DeLaveaga’s restaurant and golf course by the end of 2020. (F6)
F7:
RISK ASSESSMENT: All SCC Cities do not adequately evaluate the possible interactions between risks that may inhibit or enhance the objectives of each city.
F8:
RISK ASSESSMENT: All SCC Cities either do not maintain or do not publish a report card on the state of key infrastructure that can be used to set funding priorities and manage operational and hazard risk. Published June 19, 2020 2019–2020 Consolidated Final Report 77
F9:
RISK MANAGEMENT: Although all of the cities of SCC are preparing for increased pension costs due to current amortization schedules, they are not adequately preparing for risk associated with significant or sustained investment shortfalls in CALPERS due to economic shocks (e.g. caused by Coronavirus) or a recession.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
By January 1, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop or adopt contingency plans for realistic negative financial performance scenarios associated with CALPERS investment shortfalls (for shock and sustained downturns). (F9)
F10:
RISK MANAGEMENT: Except for the area of hazard (i.e. loss) risk management, in all SCC Cities, there is no formal method to define, track, manage, and communicate risks at the enterprise level of SCC city government.
F11:
GOVERNANCE: All SCC Cities do not have a publicly articulated pension Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) funding policy that recognizes potential pension cost risks and community expenditure/revenue priorities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop and publish a policy regarding control of retirement costs (pension and Other Pension Employee Benefits) and funding remedies for unexpected bills presented by CalPERS. (F11)
F12:
TRANSPARENCY: All SCC Cities do not adequately meet key requirements for transparency as defined by the GFOA.
F13:
TRANSPARENCY: All SCC Cities do not provide standard and understandable reporting with regard to: Pension Costs and Associated Impacts (past, current, and projected); Service Level Performance Metrics; State of Key Infrastructure; Risk Assessments and Mitigation Plans for Finance, Operational, and Hazard Risks.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop financial models that project the possibilities of realistic financial scenarios; and use these projections in their risk management practices. (F13)
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R11:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop a plan to align with the Government Financial Officers Association (GFOA) Financial Transparency Initiative. This should be extended to risk management transparency. (F6, F8,
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
22 findings
F1:
The inaccuracy of the HUD PIT Count results in significant numbers of homeless adults and children not being counted and therefore not receiving needed services.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should coordinate to perform a count of the number of homeless individuals in the County annually, and use that contact opportunity to encourage individuals to enroll in the Smart Path system. (F1)
F2:
The lack of coordination between key stakeholders is a significant barrier to the efficient and capable implementation of homelessness solutions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors and City Councils should jointly develop programs, services, and housing equitably distributed throughout each district and city in the County, communicating to the public an itemized list of such and broken down by supervisorial district by July 1, 2021. (F2)
F3:
The public opposition to homeless solutions is partially due to a lack of education, engagement and political will by City and County leadership.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By December 31, 2020, the Santa Cruz Administrative Officer (CAO) and Cities should create a Community Task Force that includes City Managers, nonprofit leaders, former homeless individuals, media personnel, community members, and political leaders to create good will, and encourage collaboration in solving homeless issues. (F3, F4)
F4:
Santa Cruz County elected officials have been unable to combat NIMBYism, which is a significant barrier to getting projects approved and built to support the homeless.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By December 31, 2020, the Santa Cruz Administrative Officer (CAO) and Cities should create a Community Task Force that includes City Managers, nonprofit leaders, former homeless individuals, media personnel, community members, and political leaders to create good will, and encourage collaboration in solving homeless issues. (F3, F4)
F5:
Inconsistent and unclear funding sources and processes inhibit the effective implementation of solutions that require long term planning and sustained operations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should collaborate to develop a JPA that would be responsible for setting short and long term goals to reduce homelessness, measuring the cost of homelessness, allocating funding, and tracking the effectiveness of funding, by July 1, 2021. (F5, F6, F19)
F6:
The Homeless Action Partnership (HAP) is not organizationally equipped with the appropriate authority, structure, leadership, staff, training or processes and as a result is ineffective in its mission of reducing homelessness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should collaborate to develop a JPA that would be responsible for setting short and long term goals to reduce homelessness, measuring the cost of homelessness, allocating funding, and tracking the effectiveness of funding, by July 1, 2021. (F5, F6, F19)
F7:
An insufficient number of treatment facilities in Santa Cruz County for mental health and substance use disorders leaves homeless individuals without necessary treatment options.
Related Recommendations (2)
R5:
The Santa Cruz County Health Services Agency should expand relationships with regional psychiatric hospitals to identify more beds and treatment options when they are unavailable in Santa Cruz County by December 31, 2020. (F7)
R16:
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should request the Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer investigate and report on the viability of converting the underutilized County Juvenile Hall campus, located at 3650 Graham Hill Rd, Felton, CA into a facility focused on fulfilling crucial homeless, mental health and substance abuse needs by December 31, 2020. (F7)
F8:
Because Santa Cruz County lacks adequate prevention and diversion programs, individuals who could remain in their homes with minimal cash assistance are ending up homeless.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
In the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should direct the agencies that provide grant funding for homeless services to prioritize more funding for case managers, diversion and prevention programs, and the extension of supportive services to more than one year when appropriate. (F8, F10, F11)
F9:
The lack of Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) results in the significant compounding of the homeless issue.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer (CAO) and the County’s City Managers should identify parcels of land within their jurisdictions that could be utilized to supply homeless services and/or temporary or permanent housing, and report such sites to their governing bodies by December 31, 2020. (F9, F21)
F10:
Supportive services are limited to one year; this limitation can contribute to instability, a loss of housing, and a return to homelessness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
In the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should direct the agencies that provide grant funding for homeless services to prioritize more funding for case managers, diversion and prevention programs, and the extension of supportive services to more than one year when appropriate. (F8, F10, F11)
F11:
A lack of case managers and outreach results in homeless individuals not having timely access to necessary supportive services.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
In the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should direct the agencies that provide grant funding for homeless services to prioritize more funding for case managers, diversion and prevention programs, and the extension of supportive services to more than one year when appropriate. (F8, F10, F11)
F12:
There are parcels of land throughout the county that appear to be unused or underutilized, and could possibly be used to build housing for the homeless.
F13:
Santa Cruz County law enforcement response to homeless, addiction, and mental health issues has the potential to criminalize social, medical, and psychological conditions. This requires law enforcement to perform the role of social worker; a role for which they lack the resources and mental health training.
Related Recommendations (2)
R9:
By December 31, 2020, the City of Santa Cruz should evaluate whether closing Coral Street permanently to thru traffic, to make more space available for additional housing and services for the homeless, would be a viable option. (F13)
R18:
Santa Cruz County should create a 24-hour mobile crisis response unit that includes medical staff and an experienced crisis worker to respond to emergency 911 calls and non-emergency police calls that do not involve legal issues or threats of violence. The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should work with the County’s law enforcement agencies to identify funds in their budgets that could be allocated to this program. The Grand Jury recommends the County consider using CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets) in Eugene, Oregon as a model. (F13)
F14:
There is a lack of leadership from County and City officials to engage the business community in exploring potential solutions to homelessness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
Beginning in December of 2020, the Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer and the County’s City Managers should direct their agencies involved with homelessness to engage with local business leaders including Chambers of Commerce, to collaborate on innovative solutions that could reduce the number of homeless. (F14)
F15:
The Rountree Detention Center provides inmates with construction skills training. This training could be effectively applied to the building of tiny homes or other structures that could provide much needed housing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The Santa Cruz County Sheriff should assess the viability of instituting a program at the Rountree Detention Center to train inmates to build small housing structures such as tiny homes or ADUs, to increase the amount of homeless housing. The results of this should be reported to the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors by December 31, 2020. (F15)
F16:
Santa Cruz County and Cities, despite owning numerous parking lots, choose not to utilize their parking lots for safe parking programs, which results in an underutilization of resources that could help reduce homeless parking in neighborhoods and business districts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
By December 31, 2020, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors and the County’s City Managers should direct appropriate agencies and staff to implement a city and county wide safe parking program using the successful model of the Association of Faith Communities (AFC). This should include investigating whether college campus parking lots could be incorporated into this program. (F16)
F17:
Faith-Based Organizations are an underutilized resource in the effort to end homelessness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should coordinate a retreat for all Faith Based Organizations (FBOs) in the County to collaborate on how to work cohesively on the issue of homelessness. (F17)
F18:
Due to the inconsistent collection of Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) data, the accuracy of funding decisions for service providers is negatively impacted.
Related Recommendations (1)
R14:
Effective with fiscal year 2021-2022, the Santa Cruz County Administrative Office should work with the Homeless Action Partnership (HAP) to ensure that grants awarded to homeless service providers require a contract that mandates the use of the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). (F18)
F19:
Santa Cruz County lacks an organization that is accountable for tracking the cost of homelessness, allocating funding, and measuring the effectiveness of funding which results in the inability to make progress toward solving the homeless problem.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should collaborate to develop a JPA that would be responsible for setting short and long term goals to reduce homelessness, measuring the cost of homelessness, allocating funding, and tracking the effectiveness of funding, by July 1, 2021. (F5, F6, F19)
F20:
There are tools available, such as Santa Clara County’s “Silicon Valley Triage Tool," that could be applied to Santa Cruz County to allow the County to better understand the true cost of homelessness enabling the County to use public resources more efficiently.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
By the beginning of fiscal year 2021-2022, Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer should develop and implement a system for tracking the cost of homeless, fashioned after the Silicon Valley Triage Tool, and require it be utilized by all agencies receiving funding for homeless services of any kind. (F20)
F21:
If underutilized parcels of land throughout Santa Cruz County were identified, such as the area near Coral Street in Santa Cruz, and the parcel adjacent to the County Government Mental Health Building in Watsonville, these parcels could potentially be used to increase the number of beds and services to support the homeless.
Related Recommendations (2)
R6:
The Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer (CAO) and the County’s City Managers should identify parcels of land within their jurisdictions that could be utilized to supply homeless services and/or temporary or permanent housing, and report such sites to their governing bodies by December 31, 2020. (F9, F21)
R17:
By December 31, 2020, Santa Cruz County Planning Department should evaluate whether using the parcel of land adjacent to the County Mental Health Building to provide more temporary or permanent housing for the homeless would be a viable option, and report the results to the Board of Supervisors by December 31, 2020. (F21)
F22:
The information provided in the ADU section of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department’s website is not user friendly, and therefore not as encouraging as it could be to homeowners looking to build much needed housing for the County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Santa Cruz County should redesign their Planning Department's ADU web page to showcase and direct interested visitors to begin the ADU process online, using the San Jose or Santa Clara Planning Department's web sites as a model by December 31, 2020. (F22)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
19 findings
F1:
City Leadership fails to consistently follow and enforce the City’s Respectful Workplace Conduct Policy and have no effective or consistent definition of egregious behavior in that policy.
Related Recommendations (4)
R2:
The City Manager and Human Resources should review their complaint procedures, perform exit interviews, and perform targeted surveys to identify where and how they can support employees in a way that City Staff feel heard and supported by December 31, 2020. (F1, F2, F4, F19)
R4:
City Council should appoint a coach to observe meetings and provide feedback and performance improvement opportunities by December 31, 2020. (F1, F3, F8,
R5:
City Council, with support from the Equal Employment Opportunity Committee and Human Resources, should write and approve a Code of Conduct that includes a specific definition of egregious behavior and their commitment to Respectful Workplace Conduct Policy enforcement by December 31, 2020. (F1,
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F2:
The City Council’s conduct policy is insufficient to guide behavior and lacks enforcement provisions.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
The City Manager and Human Resources should review their complaint procedures, perform exit interviews, and perform targeted surveys to identify where and how they can support employees in a way that City Staff feel heard and supported by December 31, 2020. (F1, F2, F4, F19)
R5:
City Council, with support from the Equal Employment Opportunity Committee and Human Resources, should write and approve a Code of Conduct that includes a specific definition of egregious behavior and their commitment to Respectful Workplace Conduct Policy enforcement by December 31, 2020. (F1,
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F3:
The onboarding process for newly elected Santa Cruz City Councilmembers is not adequate or timely, leaving them unprepared to act as a team and inadequately oriented on multiple subject matters.
Related Recommendations (3)
R1:
The City Manager should examine the current onboarding process and devise ways to ensure a smooth and timely transition for incoming Councilmembers. Input should be sought from current and previous Councilmembers and staff by December 31, 2020. (F3)
R9:
Councilmembers should define a schedule for regular one-on-one meetings to build trust and enable understanding of positions and resolution of disagreements by December 31, 2020. (F3, F5, F6, F8, F13, F15, F17)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F4:
City employees do not feel supported and protected by the City Manager and Human Resources.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
The City Manager and Human Resources should review their complaint procedures, perform exit interviews, and perform targeted surveys to identify where and how they can support employees in a way that City Staff feel heard and supported by December 31, 2020. (F1, F2, F4, F19)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F5:
There are disagreements and a lack of transparency on how the City Council meeting agendas are set.
Related Recommendations (3)
R3:
The City should establish a Transparency Task Force to create a process for establishing an open and transparent agenda setting process and to take on the task of re-establishing trust across City Hall, City Council, and the residents of the City by December 31, 2020. (F5, F17)
R9:
Councilmembers should define a schedule for regular one-on-one meetings to build trust and enable understanding of positions and resolution of disagreements by December 31, 2020. (F3, F5, F6, F8, F13, F15, F17)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F6:
Failures to amend City Council Policy 6.9 resulted in a lack of comprehensive guidelines to address interactions between City Council and City Staff.
Related Recommendations (3)
R9:
Councilmembers should define a schedule for regular one-on-one meetings to build trust and enable understanding of positions and resolution of disagreements by December 31, 2020. (F3, F5, F6, F8, F13, F15, F17)
R13:
The City Council should re-establish a working group to update the Council Policy 6.9, to more clearly define interactions between City Council and City Staff when making requests, and should do so by December 31, 2020. (F6)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F7:
Lack of a well-defined social media policy leads to confusion about the appropriate use of social media.
Related Recommendations (3)
R6:
The City should establish and incorporate into the City Council handbook a well-defined social media policy, that takes into consideration the need to preserve information pursuant to the Public Records Act. The policy should be applicable to all City Staff, Councilmembers, Commissioners, contractors, volunteers, and interns by December 31, 2020. (F7)
R7:
The City Manager should define key performance indicators for the City which cascade to department heads and third-party contractors for monitoring and management of key performance metrics by December 31, 2020. (F7, F9, F14)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F8:
The public has lost confidence in the City Leadership’s ability to function effectively.
Related Recommendations (2)
R9:
Councilmembers should define a schedule for regular one-on-one meetings to build trust and enable understanding of positions and resolution of disagreements by December 31, 2020. (F3, F5, F6, F8, F13, F15, F17)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F9:
The Assistant City Manager and City Manager do not manage to key performance indicators and measures of success.
Related Recommendations (2)
R7:
The City Manager should define key performance indicators for the City which cascade to department heads and third-party contractors for monitoring and management of key performance metrics by December 31, 2020. (F7, F9, F14)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F10:
The designation of a City Council position as part-time, with insufficient compensation, may limit the candidate pool and negatively affect City Council performance.
Related Recommendations (2)
R11:
The City Council should re-establish the Charter Amendment Committee, which will bring forward recommendations in the areas of City Council compensation, composition and workload. The committee should have sufficient authority to hire independent consultants to complete their work by December 31, 2020. (F8, F10,
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F11:
The City does not have an elected mayor position which limits the ability of voters to assign accountability when City government is dysfunctional and ineffective.
Related Recommendations (2)
R11:
The City Council should re-establish the Charter Amendment Committee, which will bring forward recommendations in the areas of City Council compensation, composition and workload. The committee should have sufficient authority to hire independent consultants to complete their work by December 31, 2020. (F8, F10,
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F12:
Lack of a formal intern policy for Councilmembers has caused confusion, disruption and a burden on City Staff.
Related Recommendations (2)
R8:
City Council should work with the City Manager and Human Resources to develop a formal policy for interns and volunteers who will be working on behalf of Councilmembers by December 31, 2020. (F12)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F13:
Lack of trust among City Councilmembers impedes constructive discourse and decision making.
Related Recommendations (3)
R4:
City Council should appoint a coach to observe meetings and provide feedback and performance improvement opportunities by December 31, 2020. (F1, F3, F8,
R9:
Councilmembers should define a schedule for regular one-on-one meetings to build trust and enable understanding of positions and resolution of disagreements by December 31, 2020. (F3, F5, F6, F8, F13, F15, F17)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F14:
The Conflict Resolution Center (CRC) contract lacks performance criteria, making it difficult to determine whether conflict resolution was successful. The CRC engagement also failed to address conflicts between City Council and City Staff.
Related Recommendations (2)
R7:
The City Manager should define key performance indicators for the City which cascade to department heads and third-party contractors for monitoring and management of key performance metrics by December 31, 2020. (F7, F9, F14)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F15:
Major conflicts and dysfunctions were recognized by City Staff, City Council, and the public in February 2019, but there was a failure to seek remediation for those conflicts until October 2019.
Related Recommendations (2)
R9:
Councilmembers should define a schedule for regular one-on-one meetings to build trust and enable understanding of positions and resolution of disagreements by December 31, 2020. (F3, F5, F6, F8, F13, F15, F17)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F16:
Without a current, detailed strategic plan, the City Staff and City Council goals and objectives are unclear.
Related Recommendations (2)
R10:
The City Council and City Manager should follow the City’s defined process for creating and updating the Five-Year Strategic Plan by December 31, 2020. (F16)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F17:
Poor performance and antagonism at City Hall resulted in lost opportunities and could impair the City's ability to raise money.
Related Recommendations (3)
R3:
The City should establish a Transparency Task Force to create a process for establishing an open and transparent agenda setting process and to take on the task of re-establishing trust across City Hall, City Council, and the residents of the City by December 31, 2020. (F5, F17)
R9:
Councilmembers should define a schedule for regular one-on-one meetings to build trust and enable understanding of positions and resolution of disagreements by December 31, 2020. (F3, F5, F6, F8, F13, F15, F17)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F18:
The City Council’s inability to control disruptive behavior during meetings increases meeting length and inhibits a representative cross-section of the public from participating.
Related Recommendations (2)
R12:
The City Council should explore creative strategies for curbing public disruption during meetings so that the Council can conduct business in an efficient manner, and Council, City Staff, and members of the public feel heard, but do not feel bullied, harassed or intimidated by December 31, 2020. (F18)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
F19:
The employee engagement survey methodology is flawed, and may not accurately represent employee sentiment. The survey does not have the ability to present results per City department and thus the interpretation of results and
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
The City Manager and Human Resources should review their complaint procedures, perform exit interviews, and perform targeted surveys to identify where and how they can support employees in a way that City Staff feel heard and supported by December 31, 2020. (F1, F2, F4, F19)
R14:
City Human Resources should establish an annual Employee Engagement and Satisfaction survey that meets standard recommended survey methods. The survey should provide effective statistical information while preserving anonymity. The results of the survey should be shared with the public by December 31, 2020. (F19)
R15:
The City Manager and City Council should independently make public acknowledgments of the difficulties and dysfunctions that have plagued the City for the last 18 months, and make commitments which are consistent with the implementation of the Grand Jury’s recommendations by December 31, 2020. (F1–19)
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
RISK ASSESSMENT: As the Auditor’s Office is an authoritative source of studies and assessments for the State Legislature, we find that the risk assessment methodology used by the Auditor’s Office is a valid and valuable approach to assessing financial risk for all SCC city jurisdictions and communicating that risk to stakeholders.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should become familiar with and adopt the Auditor’s Office risk assessment framework or a similar framework to assess financial risk. (F1)
F2:
RISK ASSESSMENT: All SCC Cities did not fully consider the calculated high risk indicators from the Auditor’s Office and their potential impacts on city operations, services, and capital assets/infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should evaluate and communicate the implications of the financial risk trends indicated in the analyses calculated from the Auditor’s Office methodology. (F2, F3)
F3:
RISK ASSESSMENT: The state of risk determined for all SCC Cities by the Auditor’s Office in 2017 remained largely unchanged through 2019.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should evaluate and communicate the implications of the financial risk trends indicated in the analyses calculated from the Auditor’s Office methodology. (F2, F3)
F4:
RISK ASSESSMENT: Pension costs contribute a higher level of financial risk to all SCC Cities than is accounted for by city documents.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should publish a standard report annually that is an understandable summary of pension risk, including a narrative on the implications of market valuation versus actuarial valuation of accrued total liabilities. (F4, F12, F13)
F5:
RISK ASSESSMENT: Financial Risk Indicators alone are not adequate to effectively understand the risks facing all SCC Cities.
Related Recommendations (2)
R4:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should identify a suite of risk indicators that support an integrated assessment of all risk types that can inhibit the ability of the city to meet its objectives. Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) provides an example of the risk types that should be considered. (F5, F6)
R5:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should adopt the practice of Bowtie Analysis, or an equivalent method, to support the understanding of risk interactions, the establishment of risk controls, and the communication of a city risk profile. (F7,
F6:
RISK ASSESSMENT: All SCC Cities do not fully identify, assess, track, and report key risk indicators that reflect the state of strategic, financial, operational, or hazard risk.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should identify a suite of risk indicators that support an integrated assessment of all risk types that can inhibit the ability of the city to meet its objectives. Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) provides an example of the risk types that should be considered. (F5, F6)
F7:
RISK ASSESSMENT: All SCC Cities do not adequately evaluate the possible interactions between risks that may inhibit or enhance the objectives of each city.
F8:
RISK ASSESSMENT: All SCC Cities either do not maintain or do not publish a report card on the state of key infrastructure that can be used to set funding priorities and manage operational and hazard risk.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should publish their own infrastructure risk report cards and any data they make available to county and state level risk assessments. (F8)
F9:
RISK MANAGEMENT: Although all of the cities of SCC are preparing for increased pension costs due to current amortization schedules, they are not adequately preparing for risk associated with significant or sustained investment shortfalls in CALPERS due to economic shocks (e.g. caused by Coronavirus) or a recession.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
By January 1, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop or adopt contingency plans for realistic negative financial performance scenarios associated with CALPERS investment shortfalls (for shock and sustained downturns). (F9)
F10:
RISK MANAGEMENT: Except for the area of hazard (i.e. loss) risk management, in all SCC Cities, there is no formal method to define, track, manage, and communicate risks at the enterprise level of SCC city government.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should evaluate the costs and benefits of implementing an Enterprise Risk Management Framework to better integrate risk management across all types of risks (Strategic, Financial, Operational, Hazard). This could take many forms, one being a shared capability through a risk sharing Joint Powers Authority (JPA). The key will be designating clear authority and responsibility for integrated risk management. (F10)
F11:
GOVERNANCE: All SCC Cities do not have a publicly articulated pension Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) funding policy that recognizes potential pension cost risks and community expenditure/revenue priorities.
Related Recommendations (2)
R10:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop and publish a policy regarding control of retirement costs (pension and Other Pension Employee Benefits) and funding remedies for unexpected bills presented by CalPERS. (F11)
R11:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop a plan to align with the Government Financial Officers Association (GFOA) Financial Transparency Initiative. This should be extended to risk management transparency. (F6, F8,
F12:
TRANSPARENCY: All SCC Cities do not adequately meet key requirements for transparency as defined by the GFOA.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should publish a standard report annually that is an understandable summary of pension risk, including a narrative on the implications of market valuation versus actuarial valuation of accrued total liabilities. (F4, F12, F13)
F13:
TRANSPARENCY: All SCC Cities do not provide standard and understandable reporting with regard to: Pension Costs and Associated Impacts (past, current, and projected); Service Level Performance Metrics; State of Key Infrastructure; Risk Assessments and Mitigation Plans for Finance, Operational, and Hazard Risks.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should publish a standard report annually that is an understandable summary of pension risk, including a narrative on the implications of market valuation versus actuarial valuation of accrued total liabilities. (F4, F12, F13)
R8:
By June 30, 2021: all SCC Cities should develop financial models that project the possibilities of realistic financial scenarios; and use these projections in their risk management practices. (F13)
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
Risk of misuse of voter registration data acquired by ELEC_2194 (1994) could be mitigated by stronger security measures at the County of Santa Cruz level.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
In Distributed Data that is provided to County Recipients, the County Elections Department should replace voter full date of birth with year of birth only. This action should be implemented before the end of FY2021. (F1)
R6:
The County Elections Department should encrypt Distributed Data to prevent data tampering and unauthorized use. This action should be implemented before the end of FY2021. (F1)
F2:
County Applicants are not informed of recent amendments to ELEC_2188 (1994), and thus may not be taking all reasonable precautions to protect voter registration data, avoid data breaches, and report breaches if they occur.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
On appropriate website pages, the County Elections Department should include links to the full text of all relevant statutes. In addition, the County Application should conform to the State Application by including the full text of relevant statutes. These actions should be implemented before the end of FY2021. (F2)
R4:
The County Elections Department should incorporate amendments to ELEC 2188 (1994), as specified in AB 1678 and AB 1044, in the County Application and website information, namely that County Recipients must inform the SoS of a data breach, and that County Applicants may be subject to data security training. This action should be implemented before the end of FY2021. (F2)
R5:
The County Elections Department should provide County Applicants with data security training, consistent with any guidance from the SoS, with the goal of implementing best practices aimed at protecting voter registration data. This action should be implemented before the end of FY2021. (F2)
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R3:
The County Elections Department should modify the County Application to conform to the State Application by requiring the County Applicant to provide a narrative stating the intended use of the Distributed Data, as well as how the Distributed Data will be secured. This action should be implemented before the end of FY2021.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
The DeLaveaga Golf Course is underutilized and has the opportunity for generating increased revenue for the City of Santa Cruz and the Operator.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department should develop additional marketing activities that focus on increasing play going forward. Those should include, but not be limited to, re-focusing relationships with local Chambers of Commerce, service clubs, “Visit Santa Cruz County”, NCGA Associate Golf Clubs, youth and senior groups, local charitable organizations, educational institutions, and religious groups. (F1)
R2:
The City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department and the Operator should coordinate evaluation of the pricing model for green fees in order to remain competitive with local golf courses and maximize revenue for the start of 2021. (F1, F5)
F2:
The DeLaveaga Golf Course has high city employee labor costs relative to other local, privately owned golf courses. This is partly due to its use of senior maintenance personnel and the pension benefits negotiated between the union employees and the City of Santa Cruz.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department should develop a staffing profile for planning purposes based on need, cost, and quality of service. This profile should compare DeLaveaga Golf Course’s maintenance staff and cost compared to other local golf courses and be used as a basis for hiring or rotating staff. This should be performed on an ongoing basis. (F2)
F3:
Water conservation strategies have been successfully employed at the DeLaveaga Golf Course to the detriment of appearance in some locations. Significant increases in the cost of water have negated positive impacts to the bottom line.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Inform the public and increase awareness of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s water usage and cost for the last 10 years by publicizing its calculations and actual numbers beginning as soon as feasible. (F3)
F4:
The City of Santa Cruz’s failure to conduct thorough, regular on-site inspections of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s restaurant/lodge resulted in excessive renovation costs to the City of Santa Cruz. This contributed to more than doubling the original estimates to bring the building up to code.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The City of Santa Cruz City Manager should perform a lessons learned activity and then update the City’s relevant policies and operating procedures to avoid a future repeat of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s restaurant/lodge shutdown and renovation no later than second quarter 2021. (F4)
F5:
The new draft Operations Plan lacks the necessary robustness to communicate how major golf course operations will be managed at DeLaveaga Golf Course, including but not limited to facility inspections, water use policies, variable pricing policies, charitable policies, operations review, and basic roles, responsibilities, and authority.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
The City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department and the Operator should coordinate evaluation of the pricing model for green fees in order to remain competitive with local golf courses and maximize revenue for the start of 2021. (F1, F5)
R6:
The City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department and the City of Santa Cruz City Manager should add a formal process to the Operation Plan by addressing needed capital improvements, maintenance schedules, facility inspections, water use, variable pricing, charitable policies, operations review, and basic stakeholder roles and responsibilities. Stakeholders include the Santa Cruz City Council, the City’s Parks and Recreation Department, the City’s Parks & Recreation Commission, the Operator, the DeLaveaga Golf Course Superintendent, the City’s Building Department and the City’s Public Works Department. (F5)
F6:
The DeLaveaga Golf Course website is not up to date and should include all current information regarding costs to various players and groups such as discounted youth green fees.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The City of Santa Cruz’s Parks and Recreation Department should validate that delaveagagolf.com includes youth pricing and current information regarding DeLaveaga’s restaurant and golf course by the end of 2020. (F6)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
County and City website information is sometimes missing, out-of-date, and inaccurate; links may be broken. Thus, many city and county departments aren't updating their websites often enough to keep citizens informed.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. (F1, F2, F5)
R2:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a protocol to be exercised quarterly, beginning January 2021, which requires department heads to confirm via documentation (initial a spreadsheet, for example) that they have verified the accuracy of their department's web information (F1, F2, F3)
F2:
County and City administrations lack a process to review content accuracy and currency and thereby assure timely correction and revision of content.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. (F1, F2, F5)
R2:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a protocol to be exercised quarterly, beginning January 2021, which requires department heads to confirm via documentation (initial a spreadsheet, for example) that they have verified the accuracy of their department's web information (F1, F2, F3)
F3:
County and City goals for website redesign or quality improvement are not sufficiently “SMART”: Specific + Measurable + Attainable + Relevant + Time-Bound.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a protocol to be exercised quarterly, beginning January 2021, which requires department heads to confirm via documentation (initial a spreadsheet, for example) that they have verified the accuracy of their department's web information (F1, F2, F3)
R3:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish ‘SMART’ goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021. (F3, F4, F5)
F4:
The County does not have a notification system by which users can be alerted to updated web content. The County's website would be enhanced by the addition of a site-wide notification system.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish ‘SMART’ goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021. (F3, F4, F5)
R4:
County ISD should provide a notification system similar to the city of Santa Cruz by June 2021 whereby users receive email or text messages when updated web information is available. (F4)
F5:
County and City website content providers do not provide an explanation in content for incorrect or out-of-date information, even though they appear to know the reasons.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. (F1, F2, F5)
R3:
The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish ‘SMART’ goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021. (F3, F4, F5)