Gran Jurado del Condado de Santa Cruz
2020-2021
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 (22)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
7 hallazgos
F1:
The California Department of Pesticide Regulation is developing a new system of notification for agricultural pesticide applications statewide and the proof of concept shows promise of being a good solution for notifying the public of pesticide application information in a timely manner.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner communicate information to the public about the “Spray Days Now” notification system being developed by the state DPR, especially in areas impacted by pesticide use. This should be completed by October 15, 2024. (F1, F2, F3, F5) 2. Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz The Grand Jury of 2020-21 investigated the high risk probability of wildfires, especially in areas surrounding the City of Santa Cruz known as the Wildland Urban Interface Area (WUI). The Grand Jury wanted to know how the high risk of wildfires was being addressed and our level of preparedness. The 2020-21 report specifically addressed the issue of homeless encampments and how they contributed to wildfire risk in WUI areas of the city.[2] 2020-21 Grand Jury Report, Recommendation R2 In the next three months, the City Council needs to have more transparent and formal coordination with the county on management of homeless resources.[2] 2020-21 R2: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The 2x2 Committee, consisting of the City’s Mayor and Vice Mayor as well as the County Supervisors from Districts 3 & 5, meets every other week on homelessness issues. The Mayor and Vice Mayor provide a verbal report on those discussions at Council meetings on a monthly basis. County/City coordination through the Homeless Action Partnership has not been as transparent as it could be; however, the County has proposed a new charter to regional participants and it should increase transparency. It has been adopted by the HAP and is proceeding with consideration by cities and the county.[2] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 96 -24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R2 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: City and County representatives began informally meeting in 2016. In January of 2018, both the City and the County formalized their respective agencies' participation and communication through a committee known as the 2x2. The 2x2 was composed of two members from the County Board of Supervisors and two members from the City Council to improve coordination between the agencies regarding homelessness issues. The goal was to form a regional response, in partnership with the County, to strengthen City efforts to improve how we respond to the homelessness crisis. In January of 2022, the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership (H4HP) Policy Board was created to replace the Homeless Action Partnership (HAP) oversight groups. The newly created H4HP serves as the federally designated Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) Continuum of Care (CoC) Board for Santa Cruz County and coordinates resources, programs, and services focused on preventing and ending homelessness.[10] [11] Prior to the creation of the H4HP Policy Board, the HAP CoC oversight groups included staff from the County's four cities, the County, a member of the health sector, members from various non-profits serving the homeless community, and those with lived experience. The HAP groups did not include elected officials. Subsequently, changes were made to the CoC governance structure to ensure broader and deeper engagement of City and County leaders in the CoC planning and decision-making process, with the additional option to include elected officials from the cities and the County on the Policy Board. The current Policy Board membership overlaps with individuals historically involved with the 2x2 and HAP. The City of Santa Cruz has two seats on the policy board, which may be filled by elected officials, government staff, or other citizens. Therefore, the 2X2 was eliminated, however staff continue to meet on a bi-weekly basis. to collaborate on projects of mutual interest related to homelessness.[12] [13] [14] Grand Jury research found that the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership is in place. This group is a collaboration between the County’s Human Services Department and a coalition of partners and resources for the purpose of preventing and ending homelessness within our County. The partnership includes a wide variety of members from the community including Santa Cruz City Council members, Board Supervisors, agency representatives, and County senior-level employees. In March 2019 the Partnership began developing the Healthy Santa Cruz County Strategic Framework. The Framework contains steps aimed to reduce “unsheltered and overall homelessness countywide by January 2024.” The Framework outlines a detailed plan to accomplish this goal.[15] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 2023–2024 Consolidated Final Report 97 With regard to the City Manager’s response to 2020-2021 Recommendation R2, the City has met its commitment to formally collaborate with the County for the purpose of managing homeless resources and reducing homelessness in our County. 2020-21 R8: Recommendation by Grand Jury In the next six months, the City Council should produce a detailed plan and accounting of how the federal and state homeless funds are used.[2] 2020-21 R8: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The City has detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent. The City received additional, direct funding from the state as part of the current state budget, and the requirements for how that will be spent and what that will fund are still to be determined. Similarly, direct funding from the American Rescue Act will go towards homelessness, but specifics related to that spending and the associated limitations are still to be determined. City staff are working with a consultant to provide a consolidated report on various City expenditures, including prior and upcoming state and federal fund expenditures. 2023-24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R8 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: A detailed plan for the use of funds was originally developed in March of 2022. The cost projections were revised in May of 2022. Further updates to the budget were presented to the City Council in December of 2022. During the budget presentations to the City Council for FY24, a summary of expenditures was presented to the City Council on May 23, 2023.[12] [16] The City’s response to the Grand Jury’s 2020-21 report states that the City has “detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent.” Yet no such information appears to have been provided. The City’s FY 2024 Annual Budget attached to the May 23, 2023 City Council meeting contains only high level revenue and expenditure line items for Homeless Response Program Funds. Revenues of $14M in 2022 appear to be a lump sum to be spread over an unknown number of years. Overall expenditure figures for 2022 (actual), 2023 (adopted budget), and 2024 (adopted budget) total approximately $20M.
F2:
The Active and Passive modes of notification will allow access to members of the public in a manner of their choosing. Some people are comfortable signing up for notifications, others are not and would prefer to look up the information anonymously. This appears to provide most people the option to choose the method with which they are most comfortable.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner communicate information to the public about the “Spray Days Now” notification system being developed by the state DPR, especially in areas impacted by pesticide use. This should be completed by October 15, 2024. (F1, F2, F3, F5) 2. Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz The Grand Jury of 2020-21 investigated the high risk probability of wildfires, especially in areas surrounding the City of Santa Cruz known as the Wildland Urban Interface Area (WUI). The Grand Jury wanted to know how the high risk of wildfires was being addressed and our level of preparedness. The 2020-21 report specifically addressed the issue of homeless encampments and how they contributed to wildfire risk in WUI areas of the city.[2] 2020-21 Grand Jury Report, Recommendation R2 In the next three months, the City Council needs to have more transparent and formal coordination with the county on management of homeless resources.[2] 2020-21 R2: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The 2x2 Committee, consisting of the City’s Mayor and Vice Mayor as well as the County Supervisors from Districts 3 & 5, meets every other week on homelessness issues. The Mayor and Vice Mayor provide a verbal report on those discussions at Council meetings on a monthly basis. County/City coordination through the Homeless Action Partnership has not been as transparent as it could be; however, the County has proposed a new charter to regional participants and it should increase transparency. It has been adopted by the HAP and is proceeding with consideration by cities and the county.[2] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 96 -24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R2 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: City and County representatives began informally meeting in 2016. In January of 2018, both the City and the County formalized their respective agencies' participation and communication through a committee known as the 2x2. The 2x2 was composed of two members from the County Board of Supervisors and two members from the City Council to improve coordination between the agencies regarding homelessness issues. The goal was to form a regional response, in partnership with the County, to strengthen City efforts to improve how we respond to the homelessness crisis. In January of 2022, the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership (H4HP) Policy Board was created to replace the Homeless Action Partnership (HAP) oversight groups. The newly created H4HP serves as the federally designated Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) Continuum of Care (CoC) Board for Santa Cruz County and coordinates resources, programs, and services focused on preventing and ending homelessness.[10] [11] Prior to the creation of the H4HP Policy Board, the HAP CoC oversight groups included staff from the County's four cities, the County, a member of the health sector, members from various non-profits serving the homeless community, and those with lived experience. The HAP groups did not include elected officials. Subsequently, changes were made to the CoC governance structure to ensure broader and deeper engagement of City and County leaders in the CoC planning and decision-making process, with the additional option to include elected officials from the cities and the County on the Policy Board. The current Policy Board membership overlaps with individuals historically involved with the 2x2 and HAP. The City of Santa Cruz has two seats on the policy board, which may be filled by elected officials, government staff, or other citizens. Therefore, the 2X2 was eliminated, however staff continue to meet on a bi-weekly basis. to collaborate on projects of mutual interest related to homelessness.[12] [13] [14] Grand Jury research found that the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership is in place. This group is a collaboration between the County’s Human Services Department and a coalition of partners and resources for the purpose of preventing and ending homelessness within our County. The partnership includes a wide variety of members from the community including Santa Cruz City Council members, Board Supervisors, agency representatives, and County senior-level employees. In March 2019 the Partnership began developing the Healthy Santa Cruz County Strategic Framework. The Framework contains steps aimed to reduce “unsheltered and overall homelessness countywide by January 2024.” The Framework outlines a detailed plan to accomplish this goal.[15] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 2023–2024 Consolidated Final Report 97 With regard to the City Manager’s response to 2020-2021 Recommendation R2, the City has met its commitment to formally collaborate with the County for the purpose of managing homeless resources and reducing homelessness in our County. 2020-21 R8: Recommendation by Grand Jury In the next six months, the City Council should produce a detailed plan and accounting of how the federal and state homeless funds are used.[2] 2020-21 R8: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The City has detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent. The City received additional, direct funding from the state as part of the current state budget, and the requirements for how that will be spent and what that will fund are still to be determined. Similarly, direct funding from the American Rescue Act will go towards homelessness, but specifics related to that spending and the associated limitations are still to be determined. City staff are working with a consultant to provide a consolidated report on various City expenditures, including prior and upcoming state and federal fund expenditures. 2023-24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R8 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: A detailed plan for the use of funds was originally developed in March of 2022. The cost projections were revised in May of 2022. Further updates to the budget were presented to the City Council in December of 2022. During the budget presentations to the City Council for FY24, a summary of expenditures was presented to the City Council on May 23, 2023.[12] [16] The City’s response to the Grand Jury’s 2020-21 report states that the City has “detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent.” Yet no such information appears to have been provided. The City’s FY 2024 Annual Budget attached to the May 23, 2023 City Council meeting contains only high level revenue and expenditure line items for Homeless Response Program Funds. Revenues of $14M in 2022 appear to be a lump sum to be spread over an unknown number of years. Overall expenditure figures for 2022 (actual), 2023 (adopted budget), and 2024 (adopted budget) total approximately $20M.
F3:
Because project delays have put off the release of the new system until the Spring of 2025, rather than 2024 as originally proposed, it is even more important that the public be made aware of what the new system will provide to them.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner communicate information to the public about the “Spray Days Now” notification system being developed by the state DPR, especially in areas impacted by pesticide use. This should be completed by October 15, 2024. (F1, F2, F3, F5) 2. Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz The Grand Jury of 2020-21 investigated the high risk probability of wildfires, especially in areas surrounding the City of Santa Cruz known as the Wildland Urban Interface Area (WUI). The Grand Jury wanted to know how the high risk of wildfires was being addressed and our level of preparedness. The 2020-21 report specifically addressed the issue of homeless encampments and how they contributed to wildfire risk in WUI areas of the city.[2] 2020-21 Grand Jury Report, Recommendation R2 In the next three months, the City Council needs to have more transparent and formal coordination with the county on management of homeless resources.[2] 2020-21 R2: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The 2x2 Committee, consisting of the City’s Mayor and Vice Mayor as well as the County Supervisors from Districts 3 & 5, meets every other week on homelessness issues. The Mayor and Vice Mayor provide a verbal report on those discussions at Council meetings on a monthly basis. County/City coordination through the Homeless Action Partnership has not been as transparent as it could be; however, the County has proposed a new charter to regional participants and it should increase transparency. It has been adopted by the HAP and is proceeding with consideration by cities and the county.[2] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 96 -24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R2 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: City and County representatives began informally meeting in 2016. In January of 2018, both the City and the County formalized their respective agencies' participation and communication through a committee known as the 2x2. The 2x2 was composed of two members from the County Board of Supervisors and two members from the City Council to improve coordination between the agencies regarding homelessness issues. The goal was to form a regional response, in partnership with the County, to strengthen City efforts to improve how we respond to the homelessness crisis. In January of 2022, the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership (H4HP) Policy Board was created to replace the Homeless Action Partnership (HAP) oversight groups. The newly created H4HP serves as the federally designated Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) Continuum of Care (CoC) Board for Santa Cruz County and coordinates resources, programs, and services focused on preventing and ending homelessness.[10] [11] Prior to the creation of the H4HP Policy Board, the HAP CoC oversight groups included staff from the County's four cities, the County, a member of the health sector, members from various non-profits serving the homeless community, and those with lived experience. The HAP groups did not include elected officials. Subsequently, changes were made to the CoC governance structure to ensure broader and deeper engagement of City and County leaders in the CoC planning and decision-making process, with the additional option to include elected officials from the cities and the County on the Policy Board. The current Policy Board membership overlaps with individuals historically involved with the 2x2 and HAP. The City of Santa Cruz has two seats on the policy board, which may be filled by elected officials, government staff, or other citizens. Therefore, the 2X2 was eliminated, however staff continue to meet on a bi-weekly basis. to collaborate on projects of mutual interest related to homelessness.[12] [13] [14] Grand Jury research found that the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership is in place. This group is a collaboration between the County’s Human Services Department and a coalition of partners and resources for the purpose of preventing and ending homelessness within our County. The partnership includes a wide variety of members from the community including Santa Cruz City Council members, Board Supervisors, agency representatives, and County senior-level employees. In March 2019 the Partnership began developing the Healthy Santa Cruz County Strategic Framework. The Framework contains steps aimed to reduce “unsheltered and overall homelessness countywide by January 2024.” The Framework outlines a detailed plan to accomplish this goal.[15] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 2023–2024 Consolidated Final Report 97 With regard to the City Manager’s response to 2020-2021 Recommendation R2, the City has met its commitment to formally collaborate with the County for the purpose of managing homeless resources and reducing homelessness in our County. 2020-21 R8: Recommendation by Grand Jury In the next six months, the City Council should produce a detailed plan and accounting of how the federal and state homeless funds are used.[2] 2020-21 R8: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The City has detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent. The City received additional, direct funding from the state as part of the current state budget, and the requirements for how that will be spent and what that will fund are still to be determined. Similarly, direct funding from the American Rescue Act will go towards homelessness, but specifics related to that spending and the associated limitations are still to be determined. City staff are working with a consultant to provide a consolidated report on various City expenditures, including prior and upcoming state and federal fund expenditures. 2023-24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R8 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: A detailed plan for the use of funds was originally developed in March of 2022. The cost projections were revised in May of 2022. Further updates to the budget were presented to the City Council in December of 2022. During the budget presentations to the City Council for FY24, a summary of expenditures was presented to the City Council on May 23, 2023.[12] [16] The City’s response to the Grand Jury’s 2020-21 report states that the City has “detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent.” Yet no such information appears to have been provided. The City’s FY 2024 Annual Budget attached to the May 23, 2023 City Council meeting contains only high level revenue and expenditure line items for Homeless Response Program Funds. Revenues of $14M in 2022 appear to be a lump sum to be spread over an unknown number of years. Overall expenditure figures for 2022 (actual), 2023 (adopted budget), and 2024 (adopted budget) total approximately $20M.
F4:
As science progresses, less toxic pesticides are being developed and released regularly, and growers are finding acceptable alternatives to many pesticides. Less toxic pesticide use in Santa Cruz county is leading to lower risks to human and environmental health.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner makes known to City of Watsonville officials and various governmental agencies information about advances in agricultural pest control, including less toxic pesticides and alternative methods of pest eradication. This information should be shared by September 30, 2024. (F4, F5)
R2:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner inform the public about advances in agricultural pest control, particularly to residents in areas commonly exposed to pesticide applications. This should be completed by October 15, 2024. (F4, F5)
F5:
Communication between the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office and other south county officials concerning pesticide management is not adequate, leading to a higher risk to human health. Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 2023–2024 Consolidated Final Report 95
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner makes known to City of Watsonville officials and various governmental agencies information about advances in agricultural pest control, including less toxic pesticides and alternative methods of pest eradication. This information should be shared by September 30, 2024. (F4, F5)
R2:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner inform the public about advances in agricultural pest control, particularly to residents in areas commonly exposed to pesticide applications. This should be completed by October 15, 2024. (F4, F5)
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner communicate information to the public about the “Spray Days Now” notification system being developed by the state DPR, especially in areas impacted by pesticide use. This should be completed by October 15, 2024. (F1, F2, F3, F5) 2. Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz The Grand Jury of 2020-21 investigated the high risk probability of wildfires, especially in areas surrounding the City of Santa Cruz known as the Wildland Urban Interface Area (WUI). The Grand Jury wanted to know how the high risk of wildfires was being addressed and our level of preparedness. The 2020-21 report specifically addressed the issue of homeless encampments and how they contributed to wildfire risk in WUI areas of the city.[2] 2020-21 Grand Jury Report, Recommendation R2 In the next three months, the City Council needs to have more transparent and formal coordination with the county on management of homeless resources.[2] 2020-21 R2: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The 2x2 Committee, consisting of the City’s Mayor and Vice Mayor as well as the County Supervisors from Districts 3 & 5, meets every other week on homelessness issues. The Mayor and Vice Mayor provide a verbal report on those discussions at Council meetings on a monthly basis. County/City coordination through the Homeless Action Partnership has not been as transparent as it could be; however, the County has proposed a new charter to regional participants and it should increase transparency. It has been adopted by the HAP and is proceeding with consideration by cities and the county.[2] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 96 -24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R2 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: City and County representatives began informally meeting in 2016. In January of 2018, both the City and the County formalized their respective agencies' participation and communication through a committee known as the 2x2. The 2x2 was composed of two members from the County Board of Supervisors and two members from the City Council to improve coordination between the agencies regarding homelessness issues. The goal was to form a regional response, in partnership with the County, to strengthen City efforts to improve how we respond to the homelessness crisis. In January of 2022, the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership (H4HP) Policy Board was created to replace the Homeless Action Partnership (HAP) oversight groups. The newly created H4HP serves as the federally designated Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) Continuum of Care (CoC) Board for Santa Cruz County and coordinates resources, programs, and services focused on preventing and ending homelessness.[10] [11] Prior to the creation of the H4HP Policy Board, the HAP CoC oversight groups included staff from the County's four cities, the County, a member of the health sector, members from various non-profits serving the homeless community, and those with lived experience. The HAP groups did not include elected officials. Subsequently, changes were made to the CoC governance structure to ensure broader and deeper engagement of City and County leaders in the CoC planning and decision-making process, with the additional option to include elected officials from the cities and the County on the Policy Board. The current Policy Board membership overlaps with individuals historically involved with the 2x2 and HAP. The City of Santa Cruz has two seats on the policy board, which may be filled by elected officials, government staff, or other citizens. Therefore, the 2X2 was eliminated, however staff continue to meet on a bi-weekly basis. to collaborate on projects of mutual interest related to homelessness.[12] [13] [14] Grand Jury research found that the Santa Cruz County Housing for Health Partnership is in place. This group is a collaboration between the County’s Human Services Department and a coalition of partners and resources for the purpose of preventing and ending homelessness within our County. The partnership includes a wide variety of members from the community including Santa Cruz City Council members, Board Supervisors, agency representatives, and County senior-level employees. In March 2019 the Partnership began developing the Healthy Santa Cruz County Strategic Framework. The Framework contains steps aimed to reduce “unsheltered and overall homelessness countywide by January 2024.” The Framework outlines a detailed plan to accomplish this goal.[15] Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 2023–2024 Consolidated Final Report 97 With regard to the City Manager’s response to 2020-2021 Recommendation R2, the City has met its commitment to formally collaborate with the County for the purpose of managing homeless resources and reducing homelessness in our County. 2020-21 R8: Recommendation by Grand Jury In the next six months, the City Council should produce a detailed plan and accounting of how the federal and state homeless funds are used.[2] 2020-21 R8: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz City Council Has not yet been implemented but will be in the future. The City has detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent. The City received additional, direct funding from the state as part of the current state budget, and the requirements for how that will be spent and what that will fund are still to be determined. Similarly, direct funding from the American Rescue Act will go towards homelessness, but specifics related to that spending and the associated limitations are still to be determined. City staff are working with a consultant to provide a consolidated report on various City expenditures, including prior and upcoming state and federal fund expenditures. 2023-24 Grand Jury Follow-up and City Response to R8 The following is an excerpt from the Office of the City Manager of Santa Cruz in response to the Grand Jury’s request for their follow-up to recommendations made in the 2020-21 Grand Jury report Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz: A detailed plan for the use of funds was originally developed in March of 2022. The cost projections were revised in May of 2022. Further updates to the budget were presented to the City Council in December of 2022. During the budget presentations to the City Council for FY24, a summary of expenditures was presented to the City Council on May 23, 2023.[12] [16] The City’s response to the Grand Jury’s 2020-21 report states that the City has “detailed information on how all state and federal funds received to date have been spent.” Yet no such information appears to have been provided. The City’s FY 2024 Annual Budget attached to the May 23, 2023 City Council meeting contains only high level revenue and expenditure line items for Homeless Response Program Funds. Revenues of $14M in 2022 appear to be a lump sum to be spread over an unknown number of years. Overall expenditure figures for 2022 (actual), 2023 (adopted budget), and 2024 (adopted budget) total approximately $20M.
F6:
With regard to the City Manager’s response to Recommendation R8, the City’s FY 2024 Annual Budget does not provide a detailed plan and accounting of how homeless funds have been used. The City’s response only partially fulfilled its commitment to make related budget figures available. Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 98 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R5:
Within 90 days the City Manager should publish the figures that their initial response indicated were available for prior for years. (F6)
R6:
Within 90 days the City should publish the summary of expenditures as presented to the City Council in May 2023 that expand on the figures provided in the FY 2024 Annual Budget. (F6) 3. The CZU Lightning Complex Fire – Learn...or Burn? The CZU Lightning Complex fires of August 2020 were ignited by over three hundred lightning strikes in the counties of Santa Cruz and San Mateo. The fires burned for thirty seven days creating the largest wildfire in the history of Santa Cruz County. The 2020-21 Grand Jury wanted to know how the governmental response to the fire measured up and whether it could be deemed prepared for the next wildfire eventuality.[3] 2020-21 R3: Recommendation by Grand Jury Within the next six months, the Board of Supervisors should require that CAL FIRE produce timely after-action reports for all major incidents.[3] 2020-21 R3: Response and Explanation from Santa Cruz County Board Of Supervisors Requires further analysis CAL FIRE, as County Fire has participated in County after action reviews and participates in monthly coordination meetings with law enforcement, CAO, and The County Fire Chiefs Association met to discuss lessons learned and continues to meet and work together. Substantive concerns at the State level are outside the local span of control to address. County Fire and its State CAL FIRE partners provided a professional response under considerable strain from the magnitude of this incident.[3] [17] 2023-24 Grand Jury Follow-up and Santa Cruz County Board Of Supervisors Response to R3 The following is the response from the Director of the Office of Response, Recovery and Resiliency (OR3), David Reid, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors 2023-24: CAL FIRE has and will participate in After Action Reviews conducted by the County Office of Response, Recovery and Resilience for all major incidents that impact the County. OR3 is coordinating closely with CAL FIRE as County Fire on Wildfire Prevention activities, the County of Santa Cruz Emergency Operations Plan update, and alert and warning practices.[17] [18] In addition to the above statement from the Office of Response, Recovery and Resiliency, the Grand Jury acquired a copy of a report titled 2020 CZU Lightning Honoring Commitments to the Public published June 17, 2024 2023–2024 Consolidated Final Report 99 Complex Fire: After-Action Report and Improvement Plan, published on December 7, 2021.[19] The purpose of the report was to provide an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the Emergency Operation Center’s (EOC) core capabilities and identify improvement strategies. The County of Santa Cruz and coordinating response partners held feedback sessions in order to assess the successes and failures of the CZU response. CAL FIRE is listed in
F7:
The joint effort between CAL Fire and OR3, as well as many other partners listed in the report, to improve preparedness for future wildfires is well-documented in the above-mentioned After-Action Report and Improvement Plan. Furthermore, the Grand Jury’s recommendation that this undertaking commence within 6 months of the Grand Jury report publication did take place in the allotted time period. However, the Grand Jury did not find the original report or any published updates to the initial report that included progress towards the report’s stated objectives. Such publications would reassure the public that wildfire preparedness is a priority and is being addressed.
Recomendaciones adicionales
2
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner makes known to City of Watsonville officials and various governmental agencies, information about the “Spray Days Now” notification system being developed by the state DPR. Information should be shared by September 30, 2024. (F1, F2,
R7:
The Grand Jury requests an update as to the progress to date of the objectives outlined in the December 2021 After-Action Report in
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
12 hallazgos
F1:
Government agencies made all required responses to the 2018–2019 reports within the requested time frame.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F2:
The Santa Cruz Public Library system has honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Patron Privacy at Santa Cruz Public Libraries.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F3:
Santa Cruz County honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Santa Cruz County Probation—Officers Inadequately Equipped and At Risk.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F4:
Santa Cruz County honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders, that related to revisions to the County’s contract policies. Honoring Commitments Published May 17, 2022 14 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F5:
Santa Cruz County considered the Conflict Attorneys’ use of the County’s Watsonville office space, as committed in its response to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders, but has deferred action to the next round of contract renewal.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County 90 Days
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R5:
If the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors has formally established budget priorities for an upcoming revenue measure, the County Counsel’s impartial analysis should state this fact and note that the Board’s budget priorities are subject to change. (F5)
F6:
The County’s failure to address the Conflict Attorneys’ use of free office space means the value of this benefit may not be apparent to the Auditor and reported to appropriate tax officials, and there is no binding obligation on how the Conflict Attorneys may use this space.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County 90 Days
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R4:
The County Counsel’s impartial analysis of a revenue measure should explain how all aspects of the ballot measure will operate, including provisions for an annual audit or independent citizens oversight. (F6)
F7:
Several invited responses to the 2018–2019 reports were not made, most notably from the Santa Cruz County Counsel’s Office with regards to the report on the County’s Public Defense Contracts.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R6:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require that the County Administrative Office use its financial and budget tracking tools to provide more detail on the planned and actual use of Measure G funds than is shown in the Measure G Financial Summary of the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22. (F7)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy.
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
Recomendaciones adicionales
3
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R9:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 22. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=23 17. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Response to
R11:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 23. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=24 18. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Response to
R20:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 32. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=33 19. Jessica York. September 18, 2021. “Santa Cruz County hires local attorney as new Public Defender,” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/09/18/santa-cruz-county-hires-local-atto rney-as-new-public-defender/ 20. Confidential Grand Jury document. 21. Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. January 14, 2020. County Policy and Procedures Manual, Title V. Section 400. https://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us//personnel/vpolandproc/ProceduresManu al/PM5400.pdf 22. Confidential Grand Jury document. 23. Internal Grand Jury documents. Honoring Commitments Published May 17, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 17 Appendix A—Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Response Packet Instructions for 2018–2019[23] Instructions for Individual Respondents: Instructions for Respondents California law PC §933.05 (included below) requires the respondent to a Grand Jury report to comment on each finding and recommendation within a report. Explanations for disagreements and timeframes for further implementation or analysis must be provided. Please follow the format below when preparing the responses. Response Format 1. For the Findings included in this Response Packet, select one of the following responses and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding and specify the portion of the
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
2 hallazgos
F3:
Starting in 2020, large increases in potential funding and across the board regulatory reform have widened the opportunity for local governments to implement broadband access. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
F4:
An important beneficial outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic has been broadband access and computers for distance learning. Underserved areas, such as the Pajaro Valley where the county's need was the greatest, were significantly improved. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Internet connectivity has improved countywide. All school districts in the county, especially PVUSD, helped reduced the percentage of students without connectivity from 17% to 3%. However, the number of student who have broadband speeds is limited. Most students were provided hotspots that have connectivity at speeds much lower than broadband speeds. Required Response from theSuperintendent, Santa Cruz County Office of Education Turn On, Tune In, and Drop Out Due by August 23, 2021 2020-2021 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 211
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should coordinate with the County Office of Education to determine the costs and logistics for continuing internet access in time for the 2022-2023 school year. (F4) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe X (not to exceed six months) __ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: We need more information about this recommendation. The state has earmarked funding for infrastructure for wide array broadband access for the community. We would welcome collaborating with the Board of Supervisors on this effort. We will reach out to members of the Board of Supervisors to discuss our mutual interest to provide broadband access to our community. Required Response from theSuperintendent, Santa Cruz County Office of Education Turn On, Tune In, and Drop Out Due by August 23, 2021 212 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Recomendaciones adicionales
3
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why.
R2:
For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable.
R3:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati [email protected] and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury [email protected]. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to [email protected]. Required Response from theSuperintendent, Santa Cruz County Office of Education Turn On, Tune In, and Drop Out Due by August 23, 2021 210 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F1:
The Broadband Master Plan developed and updated in 2015 is obsolete due to subsequent actions and events.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
F2:
There has been insufficient official and public advocacy for broadband access. Advocacy cannot succeed without communication about what is being done for constituents and their input into the efforts being performed for them.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
R3:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should establish a program to educate the public concerning the need for expanded broadband access, the importance of obtaining outside funding, and the decisions to be made concerning the role of commercial ISPs. (F2, F3)
F3:
Starting in 2020, large increases in potential funding and across the board regulatory reform have widened the opportunity for local governments to implement broadband access.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
R3:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should establish a program to educate the public concerning the need for expanded broadband access, the importance of obtaining outside funding, and the decisions to be made concerning the role of commercial ISPs. (F2, F3)
R4:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should determine whether it is feasible for the county to establish, own, manage, or operate broadband access systems. (F3, F5, F6)
F4:
An important beneficial outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic has been broadband access and computers for distance learning. Underserved areas, such as the Pajaro Valley where the county's need was the greatest, were significantly improved.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should coordinate with the County Office of Education to determine the costs and logistics for continuing internet access in time for the 2022-2023 school year. (F4)
F5:
The Board of Supervisors hasn’t done enough to take advantage of the growing opportunities to promote broadband access for the county.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should determine whether it is feasible for the county to establish, own, manage, or operate broadband access systems. (F3, F5, F6)
F6:
The challenges for the establishment of rural broadband networks are significantly different for residential and business use. Coordination and funding is needed from both government and private entities. Turn On, Tune In, and Drop Out Published June 22, 2021 2020-2021 Consolidated Final Report 109
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
R4:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should determine whether it is feasible for the county to establish, own, manage, or operate broadband access systems. (F3, F5, F6)
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should identify and apply for all available broadband access funding. (F3, F5 )
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Recomendaciones adicionales
8
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
LADOC should produce an annual report detailing the status of Assessment District revenues and expenditures. (LADOC: Lompico Assessment District Oversight Committee) Response We are committed to developing a process and format for a LADOC annual report. The revised Charter and/or new Bylaws for LADOC (see response to R3) will describe the timeframe and process for producing an annual report. The contents of the annual report should be defined jointly by the District and LADOC… Actions Taken LADOC completed its first annual report for 2019, covering the period from June 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019. A copy was posted to the district’s website.[21] This includes detailed financial information, a letter from the LADOC chairperson, an update on projects, and a timeline of events. However, they are behind schedule to produce subsequent annual reports in a timely fashion. This was attributed by the board to be a time-consuming process to write the report, include citations, and proofread.[22] In addition, they stated in response to the GJ document request that the pandemic has delayed further report production.
R2:
The District should schedule annual public study sessions or workshops to review the LADOC annual report and discuss the administration of the Assessment District (AD), in order to provide in depth information to the public about the timing, funding, and execution of AD projects. Response We are committed to scheduling annual workshop-style meetings to review the LADOC annual reports, which will include discussion of current information about the timing, funding, and execution of AD-16 projects...We will go further than the Grand Jury’s recommendation by creating high-level project summaries for each discrete AD-16 project. Our goal is to post these summaries on the LADOC web page within the next year...We will also look into creating a role for designated Board and/or staff members to serve as a liaison with LADOC and its chairperson Actions Taken LADOC conducted several annual report public workshops while designing and researching its first annual report.[23] [24] Public attendance was minimal. Therefore, due to limited public interest, an informational mailer was sent to all AD customers with the link to the online report.[25]
R3:
The Board and LADOC should work in concert to create a charter for LADOC that describes in detail the committee’s responsibilities and its authority to fulfill its oversight role. Response We are committed to creating a revised Charter that describes in more detail LADOC’s responsibilities and its authority to fulfill its oversight role... A draft will be presented to LADOC for its review and comment and to the Board for approval...We will go further than the Grand Jury’s recommendation by including information in the Charter about LADOC membership, meetings, procedures and functions if such information is not provided by other documents such as the Board Manual or new LADOC Bylaws. Actions Taken The LADOC Charter was written and adopted by LADOC and approved by the Board on 3/21/2019.[26] A copy of the charter is available on the SLVWD website.
R4:
The Board should ensure that LADOC receives adequate professional, technical, and administrative support from the District, as well as the authority to carry out its oversight responsibilities. Response ...We are committed to making adequate professional, technical and administrative support available to LADOC from the District... We believe the District has professional expertise up to the task of locating appropriate resources, adapting existing resources, or creating new materials as necessary. Actions Taken The District provided hours of staff support time as requested and the annual report is the result of that support.[27]
R5:
The District should provide formal training for all LADOC citizen committee members in governance, meeting management, and the Brown Act. Response ...we will make governance, meeting management, and Brown Act training available to all members of the Board and the District’s public committee members. Within a year, we will evaluate and select a means of making such training available on a recurring or ongoing basis... We will go further than the Grand Jury’s recommendation by including government ethics training for public members of committees as part of the training regimen… Actions Taken Training was provided to the LADOC on 1/23/2019 including Brown Act and ethics, presented by the Chief Risk Officer of the Special District Risk Management Authority.[28] Training on Ethics and the Brown Act was attended by past committee members. Brown Act training was also provided on 1/7/2021; the training package was entitled “The Brown Act and Social Media”.[29] The presentation was done by District Counsel. New member training is planned for the first meeting of 2021.
R6:
The District should provide formal training about assessment districts to LADOC members and all others involved in the administration of the Assessment District. Response ...For Board and LADOC members, we will have additional training about assessment districts... We will go further than the Grand Jury’s recommendation by coming up with a mechanism for posing questions about, e.g., the implications of changes to AD-16 projects, and addressing them. Actions Taken The LADOC Charter confirmed commitment for training. Discussion on training implementation was put on hold due to COVID-19 and CZU Complex Fire emergencies. The County identified an expert resource who retired and is no longer available; the District Manager has contacted a consulting firm to develop training. This option will be considered during the first meeting of 2021.[30]
R7:
The District should record all Board and committee meetings, and post the recordings online for public access. Response ...we are committed to going above and beyond open meeting requirements by recording all Board and committee meetings and posting the recordings online to maximize public access. Actions Taken The District works with Community Television (CTV) to make Board meetings accessible to the public. Since April 2020, CTV has been hosting District meetings via the Zoom platform and broadcasting regular meetings on local television with video of past meetings available on their website.[31]
R8:
The District should provide formal training to all Board and committee members and senior staff on how to communicate with the public on contentious issues. Response ...we will add training on how to communicate with the public on contentious issues...Ideally the training would be provided by someone familiar with the local community. Actions Taken The District contracted with Municipal Resource Group to conduct this training as an all-day public meeting, hosted by video conferencing, on 7/22/2020.[32] The District held a follow-up discussion at a regular meeting on 11/5/2020. Follow-up questions include annual discussion of the Code of Conduct, manual for new board members, best practices documentation, etc.[33] Conclusion and Commendation The 2018 GJ report summary recommended: “Better communication on difficult matters, an informed and effective Assessment District oversight committee, and an unwavering commitment to public access…” The grand jury recommendations have been met with strong commitment and positive improvement in leadership, process, and transparency. The Grand Jury commends the SLVWD and LADOC for their ongoing commitment and positive stewardship of their responsibilities. Investigation 2: Data-Driven Budgeting – New Ways To Get Better Results The 2017-18 Report Abstract: The incremental process the County is currently using communicates minimal program information and limits public insight into the budgeting process. Moving to a data-driven, performance-based budgeting process will enable the County to better communicate, and the public to better understand, how and why spending decisions are made.[34] This 2017-2018 Grand Jury report looked at the County´s intent to move from an annual incremental budget process to a system that is driven by data and measurable outcomes.[4] It made a number of
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F1:
Location information on the Notices of Intent provided by the growers and qualified applicators does not adequately describe the location of the pesticide application in a way that someone not intimately familiar with the farm could understand. This means that timely online posting of the current Notices of Intent, even if possible, would not be helpful to the public. The Department of Pesticide Regulation requires a map useful to the public on the Annual Notification of Pesticides Used Near Schools and Child Day Care Centers form.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months, the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office should initiate a pilot program to train interested growers and applicators to use the CalAgPermits software. Goals of the pilot program should include recommendations enhancing the usefulness of the software program to growers and reducing the workload of the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office. (F1, F2, F4)
R3:
Within six months, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F2:
The Department of Pesticide Regulation’s policies on application of pesticides near schools and its May 7, 2020 letter to California Agricultural Commissioners show its awareness of the changing need to inform and protect the public living near agricultural pesticide application sites.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months, the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office should initiate a pilot program to train interested growers and applicators to use the CalAgPermits software. Goals of the pilot program should include recommendations enhancing the usefulness of the software program to growers and reducing the workload of the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office. (F1, F2, F4)
R3:
Within six months, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F3:
Department of Pesticide Regulation policy changes must be influenced by the Board of Supervisors. The Agricultural Commissioner cannot exert such influence. The Board of Supervisors are in the best position to lobby the Department of Pesticide Regulation.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R2:
Within six months, the Board of Supervisors should assess and initiate online posting, text, or email notification of pesticide applications for nearby neighborhoods. (F3, F4)
R3:
Within six months, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F4:
The Agricultural Commissioner has the difficult job of reconciling conflicting interests. The Agricultural Commissioner must consider and protect the interests of the growers, the nearby community members, the county schools, and the Department of Pesticide Regulation.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Within six months, the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office should initiate a pilot program to train interested growers and applicators to use the CalAgPermits software. Goals of the pilot program should include recommendations enhancing the usefulness of the software program to growers and reducing the workload of the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office. (F1, F2, F4)
R2:
Within six months, the Board of Supervisors should assess and initiate online posting, text, or email notification of pesticide applications for nearby neighborhoods. (F3, F4)
R3:
Within six months, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F5:
There is a demonstrated capability for advance public notice of pesticide use.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
Within six months, the Board of Supervisors should collaborate with other counties to lobby the Department of Pesticide Regulation for funds to implement a statewide program of notification, similar to the now defunded FarmingSafelyNearSchools program. (F5)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F1:
The Broadband Master Plan developed and updated in 2015 is obsolete due to subsequent actions and events.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
F2:
There has been insufficient official and public advocacy for broadband access. Advocacy cannot succeed without communication about what is being done for constituents and their input into the efforts being performed for them.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
R3:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should establish a program to educate the public concerning the need for expanded broadband access, the importance of obtaining outside funding, and the decisions to be made concerning the role of commercial ISPs. (F2, F3)
F3:
Starting in 2020, large increases in potential funding and across the board regulatory reform have widened the opportunity for local governments to implement broadband access.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
R3:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should establish a program to educate the public concerning the need for expanded broadband access, the importance of obtaining outside funding, and the decisions to be made concerning the role of commercial ISPs. (F2, F3)
R4:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should determine whether it is feasible for the county to establish, own, manage, or operate broadband access systems. (F3, F5, F6)
F4:
An important beneficial outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic has been broadband access and computers for distance learning. Underserved areas, such as the Pajaro Valley where the county's need was the greatest, were significantly improved.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should coordinate with the County Office of Education to determine the costs and logistics for continuing internet access in time for the 2022-2023 school year. (F4)
F5:
The Board of Supervisors hasn’t done enough to take advantage of the growing opportunities to promote broadband access for the county.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should determine whether it is feasible for the county to establish, own, manage, or operate broadband access systems. (F3, F5, F6)
F6:
The challenges for the establishment of rural broadband networks are significantly different for residential and business use. Coordination and funding is needed from both government and private entities.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors needs to update the 2015 Master Plan within the next six months including, but not limited to: 1) the special difficulties and costs posed by rural broadband infrastructure; 2) the challenges and infrastructure achievements in 2020 due to the COVID-19 crisis; and 3) opportunities for new funding sources and due to regulatory changes from the California State and Federal Government and how they are to be coordinated with the efforts to date to provide distance learning and broadband access. (F1, F2, F3, F6)
R4:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should determine whether it is feasible for the county to establish, own, manage, or operate broadband access systems. (F3, F5, F6)
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Within the next six months the Board of Supervisors should identify and apply for all available broadband access funding. (F3, F5 )
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
7 hallazgos
F1:
Since distance learning will continue after schools reopen, students, teachers, families, and administrators will need to continue learning new ways to operate and will require continued support.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months, to prepare for continued distance learning, and possible future situations, PVUSD should survey students, teachers and parents to evaluate what worked and what didn’t work regarding distance learning. (F1, F2, F6)
R3:
PVUSD should continue to keep their website updated with information and resources for teachers, students and families, including social-emotional issues, community support organizations, and educational resources.(F1, F2)
F2:
Students, teachers, and families were well-served by the continuously-updated information provided by the PVUSD Superintendent’s weekly FAQ postings on PVUSD’s website.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months, to prepare for continued distance learning, and possible future situations, PVUSD should survey students, teachers and parents to evaluate what worked and what didn’t work regarding distance learning. (F1, F2, F6)
R3:
PVUSD should continue to keep their website updated with information and resources for teachers, students and families, including social-emotional issues, community support organizations, and educational resources.(F1, F2)
F3:
The administrators, teachers, parents, and students themselves are all understandably concerned about students’ social-emotional issues arising from the pandemic.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
Within six months, PVUSD should use forthcoming federal and state money to provide summer and after-school programs to help with learning loss and social-emotional issues. (F3, F6)
F4:
The reasons that approximately 2% of PVUSD students have been “lost” are not well understood. Possible answers might include that they are either not logging on at all, or have left the area.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
Within six months, “lost” students who are still in the district should be located and their needs addressed. (F4)
F5:
The Safe Spaces program has worked well, supporting online learning as well as providing counseling and food to students.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
PVUSD should continue the Safe Spaces program. Evaluate and modify over time as students return to school. (F5)
F6:
Even with all the training provided to teachers, and internet accessibility provided to students, distance learning has not worked well for some students.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months, to prepare for continued distance learning, and possible future situations, PVUSD should survey students, teachers and parents to evaluate what worked and what didn’t work regarding distance learning. (F1, F2, F6)
R4:
Within six months, PVUSD should use forthcoming federal and state money to provide summer and after-school programs to help with learning loss and social-emotional issues. (F3, F6)
F7:
Additional upgrades in school air quality systems and furniture are necessary to comply with COVID-19 safety protocols.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
Within nine months, PVUSD should use forthcoming funds to make necessary upgrades in air quality systems and furniture in the schools. (F7)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
9 hallazgos
F1:
The Board of Supervisors has failed to assert and exercise proper oversight within their purview of the Main jail.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
R3:
Within six months the Sheriff should propose for the Board of Supervisors’ review and approval an increase in Correction Officer staffing and associated budget to reduce the need for mandatory overtime and to sufficiently staff the Main Jail. (F1, F9)
F2:
Adoption of a Sheriffs Oversight Board or Inspector General under Government Code § 25303.7 will provide necessary public transparency and structure to support the Board of Supervisors’ supervision of the Sheriff’s Office Corrections Bureau.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
F3:
Adoption of a Sheriffs Oversight Board or Inspector General under Government Code § 25303.7 will provide an effective advocate before the Board of Supervisors and the public regarding the Sheriff’s needs.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
F4:
The Correction’s Policy Manual must provide timely, comprehensive, applicable, and consistent guidelines for jail operations that serve to assure the safety of inmates and staff.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
R4:
Within six months the Sheriff should amend the Correction’s Policy Manual to remove inapplicable provisions and to add provisions relating to razors that more effectively limit and control the conditions of their use by inmates. (F4, F5)
F5:
The policies in the Correction’s Policy Manual regarding razors do not sufficiently assure that razors cannot be used by inmates to harm themselves or others.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
R4:
Within six months the Sheriff should amend the Correction’s Policy Manual to remove inapplicable provisions and to add provisions relating to razors that more effectively limit and control the conditions of their use by inmates. (F4, F5)
F6:
Events of violence and death in the Main Jail contrast negatively with the Sheriff's Office mission, visions, and goals.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
F7:
Old and outdated equipment and systems in the Main Jail are detrimental to safe, efficient, and effective management of the facility.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
R5:
Within three months the Sheriff’s Office and the General Services Department should establish formal protocols for regular monthly meetings to review the status of all correctional facilities, including providing estimates of completion for any repairs and/or replacements that are outstanding, and prioritizing items that directly affect the health and safety of inmates and/or staff. Such meetings should be documented and open to inspection by the County Administrative Officer and the Board of Supervisors. (F7, F8)
R6:
Within 60 days the Sheriff’s Office and the General Services Department should provide a written report to the Board of Supervisors and the Chief Administrative Officer providing both the specifications for, and a timeline for completion of each stage of the project to replace and/or repair the backup emergency power system, and thereafter update such report every thirty days until such project is completed. (F7, F8)
F8:
Long delays in replacing the backup power generators put staff and inmates at risk in the event of a power failure.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
R5:
Within three months the Sheriff’s Office and the General Services Department should establish formal protocols for regular monthly meetings to review the status of all correctional facilities, including providing estimates of completion for any repairs and/or replacements that are outstanding, and prioritizing items that directly affect the health and safety of inmates and/or staff. Such meetings should be documented and open to inspection by the County Administrative Officer and the Board of Supervisors. (F7, F8)
R6:
Within 60 days the Sheriff’s Office and the General Services Department should provide a written report to the Board of Supervisors and the Chief Administrative Officer providing both the specifications for, and a timeline for completion of each stage of the project to replace and/or repair the backup emergency power system, and thereafter update such report every thirty days until such project is completed. (F7, F8)
F9:
Limited staffing and requiring mandatory overtime of Correction Officers at the Main Jail are detrimental to performance, staff morale, and contribute to human error which can threaten the health and safety of staff and inmates.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should either establish a Sheriff Oversight Board or Inspector General as provided in Government Code § 25303.7, or alternatively place the issue before the voters in the county. (F1–F9)
R2:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should agendize and open for public comment issues raised by Government Code § 25303.7. (F1–F9)
R3:
Within six months the Sheriff should propose for the Board of Supervisors’ review and approval an increase in Correction Officer staffing and associated budget to reduce the need for mandatory overtime and to sufficiently staff the Main Jail. (F1, F9)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
4 hallazgos
F1:
The Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County’s web page listing COVID-19 testing sites does not adequately help residents find an appropriate testing site to fit their needs.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
Within the next 3 months the Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County should revise its web pages to help people find a testing site suitable to their requirements. Listing sites without characterizations is not sufficient. (F1)
F2:
The Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County’s Save Lives Santa Cruz County webpages do not adequately publicize and inform the public of the critical work that is being done, nor do they reflect the crisis the county has gone through.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R2:
Within the next 3 months the Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County should publicize the Save Lives Santa Cruz initiative beyond what is currently on their website. For example, they should publish the Save Lives weekly operational review for the public to see the behind the scenes work that is happening. (F2)
R3:
Within the next 3 months the Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County should prepare weekly highlights from the Save Lives periodic reports for public consumption. (F2, F4)
R4:
Within the next 3 months the Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County should provide a regularly scheduled and recorded video report available to the public on the county website. (F2, F4)
F3:
Establishing the COVID-19 testing laboratory at University of California at Santa Cruz is a great example of cooperation among the university and public agencies in the county. The laboratory has received considerable attention but the cooperative effort among the County Public Health Division, Community Foundation of Santa Cruz County and UCSC has not.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
Within the next 3 months the Health Service Agency of Santa Cruz County should create a press release detailing the support that was provided for the UCSC Laboratory. (F3)
F4:
The Santa Cruz County Public Health Division is staffed by well trained, skilled and knowledgeable professionals who applied that talent to help protect the residents of Santa Cruz County during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R3:
Within the next 3 months the Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County should prepare weekly highlights from the Save Lives periodic reports for public consumption. (F2, F4)
R4:
Within the next 3 months the Health Services Agency of Santa Cruz County should provide a regularly scheduled and recorded video report available to the public on the county website. (F2, F4)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
9 hallazgos
F1:
Despite recognizing that the most important factor to reduce fire risk in the WUI area is the removal of entrenched encampments, the City has only done this in reaction to extreme emergency situations, instead of on a proactive basis.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
Before the height of fire season, the City Council should agendize and recognize the fire risk from encampments and craft an ordinance to address these issues. (F1, F2)
F2:
The Temporary Outdoor Living Ordinance was a significant step toward proactive management and mitigating the risks associated with entrenched encampments.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
Before the height of fire season, the City Council should agendize and recognize the fire risk from encampments and craft an ordinance to address these issues. (F1, F2)
F3:
The coordination between the City and the County on homeless issues is insufficient and not transparent to the public.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R2:
In the next three months, the City Council needs to have more transparent and formal coordination with the county on management of homeless resources. (F3)
R8:
In the next six months, the City Council should produce a detailed plan and accounting of how the federal and state homeless funds are used. (F3)
F4:
Accurate data, including a count of the unhoused living in Santa Cruz, is necessary to assess and manage the fire risks from encampments.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
In the next three months, the City Manager should establish a procedure for conducting regular quarterly surveys of the number and location of the City’s unhoused population to more effectively manage fire risks in WUI areas. (F4)
F5:
Based on the amount of debate and public concern about fire safety of eucalyptus, the Fire Department has done insufficient outreach on this topic.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
In the next 12 months, the Santa Cruz Fire Department should educate the public on risk of fires caused by eucalyptus versus other vegetation. This would help all communities with eucalyptus trees realize the importance of vegetation management and not just in Firewise neighborhoods. (F5)
F6:
There are still WUI neighborhoods without a Firewise group. Firewise groups decrease the risk of fire in WUI areas through public education about protecting property and vegetation management.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
In the next 12 months, the Santa Cruz Fire Department should work to establish a Firewise community in every WUI area of the City. (F6)
F7:
The City of Santa Cruz doesn’t do enough to show that they are limited in what they can do to remove encampments along highways as this property is owned by Caltrans and under state law.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R9:
In the next three months, the City Manager should notify the public that Caltrans is responsible for the removal of all encampments along state highways. (F7)
R10:
Continually, the City Council should engage state offices to be more involved in encampment situations. This should be with all homeless encampments on Caltrans property and not just for highway widening projects. (F7)
F8:
The 10% across the board budget cuts do not match priorities of the City.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R7:
Before the budget cycle, the City Manager should revisit budget priorities. (F8)
F9:
The holding in Martin v. City of Boise limited the City’s ability to enforce existing ordinances. TOLO was a carefully crafted attempt to manage fire risks from entrenched encampments.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The City Council should continue efforts to revise ordinances to comply with recent case law so they will allow more effective management of encampments to reduce fire risks. (F9)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
9 hallazgos
F1:
Residents are still concerned about response, evacuation, and future preparation in the aftermath of the CZU Lightning Complex Fire. They are understandably irate. The supervisors, elected to their positions by our community, fail to recognize that they are responsible to adequately address these concerns.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R1:
In the next 30 days the Board of Supervisors should conduct an investigation to challenge Cal Fire on their preparation for future fire events, Cal Fire’s response to the CZU Complex Fire, and give satisfactory answers to all residents’ questions and concerns as documented in this report. (F1, F2, F3)
R2:
In the next six months the Board of Supervisors should adopt a formal policy for handling and logging resident complaints and requests for information. (F1, F3)
R3:
Within the next six months, the Board of Supervisors should require that Cal Fire produce timely after-action reports for all major incidents. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
R4:
In the next 90 days the Board of Supervisors should direct staff to produce a lessons-learned document for the public summarizing their investigation of Cal Fire and an action plan detailing how preparation for future fire events and response will be improved. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
F2:
There was a marked difference in content and depth of analysis between Cal Fire’s Virtual Community Meeting presentation given to San Mateo County and the two given to Santa Cruz County. The discrepancy is disappointing and not acceptable.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
In the next 30 days the Board of Supervisors should conduct an investigation to challenge Cal Fire on their preparation for future fire events, Cal Fire’s response to the CZU Complex Fire, and give satisfactory answers to all residents’ questions and concerns as documented in this report. (F1, F2, F3)
R3:
Within the next six months, the Board of Supervisors should require that Cal Fire produce timely after-action reports for all major incidents. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
R4:
In the next 90 days the Board of Supervisors should direct staff to produce a lessons-learned document for the public summarizing their investigation of Cal Fire and an action plan detailing how preparation for future fire events and response will be improved. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
F3:
The Board of Supervisors did not adequately respond to their constituents' concerns and questions.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
In the next 30 days the Board of Supervisors should conduct an investigation to challenge Cal Fire on their preparation for future fire events, Cal Fire’s response to the CZU Complex Fire, and give satisfactory answers to all residents’ questions and concerns as documented in this report. (F1, F2, F3)
R2:
In the next six months the Board of Supervisors should adopt a formal policy for handling and logging resident complaints and requests for information. (F1, F3)
F4:
The Board of Supervisors has not held Cal Fire accountable for their lack of analysis of their performance in the CZU Lightning Complex fire.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R3:
Within the next six months, the Board of Supervisors should require that Cal Fire produce timely after-action reports for all major incidents. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
R4:
In the next 90 days the Board of Supervisors should direct staff to produce a lessons-learned document for the public summarizing their investigation of Cal Fire and an action plan detailing how preparation for future fire events and response will be improved. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
F5:
No provision exists in the current contract between the county and Cal Fire to develop after-action reports during the non-fire season.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R3:
Within the next six months, the Board of Supervisors should require that Cal Fire produce timely after-action reports for all major incidents. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
R4:
In the next 90 days the Board of Supervisors should direct staff to produce a lessons-learned document for the public summarizing their investigation of Cal Fire and an action plan detailing how preparation for future fire events and response will be improved. (F1, F2, F4, F5)
F6:
The Board of Supervisors’ responses to the Findings and Recommendations of the 2020 Ready? Aim? Fire! report show a lack of engagement with the material and a lack of understanding of their role as advocates for the county.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The Board of Supervisors should revisit its responses to the Grand Jury’s 2020 Ready? Aim? Fire! Report, and rewrite their responses by December 31, 2021 in a document posted on their website to demonstrate hands-on engagement and better preparation for the next fire season. (F6)
F7:
The adequacy of resources for firefighting in the future is questioned due to uncertainty of mutual aid assistance, deployment and management of volunteer companies, and availability of funding.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
Within six months the Board of Supervisors should direct staff to advocate for additional funding for fire preparation and prevention resources from the state of California. (F7)
F24:
The annual report to the County BoS X DISAGREE – The County Fire/CAL and the County Administrative Office by FIRE Chief gave a State of the State County Fire/CAL FIRE does not provide presentation to the Board during Budget data or analysis of resources, response Hearings, which provided both data and times, code enforcement, inspection, or analysis of resources, response times, education. This information is necessary code enforcement, inspection, and to show what gaps exist between current education. This is aligned with the budget performance and community needs in process. This presentation is also given to order for informed budget decisions to be the Fire Dept Advisory commission made. Without adequate background (FDAC), holds {sic} responsibility to information, the BoS is unable to hold provide oversite {sic} of these. CAL FIRE accountable for the specific responsibilities specified in their contract.
F26:
Reporting data, statistics, and X AGREE 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. Report Recommendations BoS Responses
Recomendaciones adicionales
2
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R9:
Each year, during the budget X REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – presentation, the County BoS should There is currently no funding for a require County Fire to provide a vegetation management plan for the vegetation management plan, including a County Fire Department. We currently priority list of projects and a timeframe for coordinate with CAL FIRE on a priority list their completion. of projects that have timeline {sic} related to available funding. In order to implement such and {sic} process will require additional analysis and potential funding.
R17:
The County Office of Emergency X REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – Services should evaluate, quantify, and An after-action review is conducted after report to the County BoS on the specifics every major incident and disaster of the public state of preparedness for a response. Due to the CZU Lightning large-scale emergency such as wildfire by Complex Fire, these areas will also be June, 2021. addressed during the after-action review, identifying operational effectiveness as well as areas for improvement.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
30 hallazgos
F1:
Vegetation/fuel management and abatement are not receiving the attention nor funding needed from the County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors, and therefore are not adhering to California Government Executive Order 1.8.19-EO-N-05-19.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R9:
Each year, during the budget presentation, the County Board of Supervisors should require County Fire to provide a vegetation management plan, including a priority list of projects and a timeframe for their completion. (F1, F10, F16, F29)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
F2:
Santa Cruz County residents are at increased risk of fire danger due to the lack of risk management for wildfire. Specific risks are not formally identified, tracked, assessed for impact, nor is progress reported by fire departments in the County. Therefore, leaders responsible for budgets and accountability are left unprepared to manage risk, impact, or performance.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (6)
R2:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE and County Fire to provide quarterly and annual reports to the County General Services Department with specified data and success metrics for each of the contract requirements, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
R3:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE, in conjunction with the General Services Department, to provide annual operations reviews with performance metrics and annual improvement objectives, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
R4:
The fire districts of Santa Cruz County should establish a plan by January 2021, to develop actionable Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP) that follow the framework established by the 2018 Santa Cruz County - San Mateo County CWPP. (F2, F5, F22)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
R13:
LAFCO review of County fire districts should include the review of fire risk reduction plans and achievements, and LAFCO should perform this specific and focused review for all districts by June 2021. (F2, F28)
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:
City and County officials have not collaborated with PG&E to identify the location of high risk PG&E electrical equipment, and so are left uninformed as to how to manage their responsibilities or how to instruct residents about potential danger due to proximity to this equipment.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
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:
Most of Santa Cruz County in addition to the City of Santa Cruz with its large eucalyptus groves are not being monitored by the ALERTWildfire Imaging Surveillance system and would be well served by the installation of cameras capable of monitoring coastal areas occupied by eucalyptus groves in areas harboring potential sources of ignition.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
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:
Santa Cruz County would greatly benefit if steps were taken to implement the CAL FIRE, San Mateo - Santa Cruz Unit 2018 recommendation of developing detailed, site specific Community Wildfire Protection Plans for communities throughout the County. Emergency Response
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The fire districts of Santa Cruz County should establish a plan by January 2021, to develop actionable Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP) that follow the framework established by the 2018 Santa Cruz County - San Mateo County CWPP. (F2, F5, F22)
F6:
Response time data for fire departments in Santa Cruz County is challenging to obtain. Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 previously reported response time data in their annual reports, but did not do so in the 2018 or 2019 annual reports.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R5:
Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 should include response time data, for each fire department in their annual reports, starting with the 2020 annual report. (F6, F26)
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:
Residents living in the CSA-48 receive a lower level of emergency medical support than those living in more urban areas where ALS is provided.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
The County Board of Supervisors should request that the County Fire Chief submit an analysis and a recommended plan to assess whether to provide Advanced Life Support (ALS) year round to the County Fire service area by the 2021-2022 budget. (F7)
F8:
Santa Cruz County Fire, through its contract with CAL FIRE, has not been meeting the “two in, two out" requirement, reducing their ability to respond effectively and quickly to individuals or structures needing attention in a fire emergency. Proposition 218 was proposed and passed to be able to satisfy the “two in, two out” requirement, without a clear commitment by County Fire that that standard will be consistently met in all CSA-48 locations. In addition, no analysis was presented to quantify the effect on response time.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R7:
County Fire should provide a plan to the County Board of Supervisors by September 30, 2020 identifying how and when the new CSA 48 tax revenue will result in the addition of six more firefighters to the response team, enabling the required “two in, two out” in a fire emergency. (F8)
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 number of County Fire volunteer firefighters has decreased from 110 to 60 since 2004. There has been no analysis done on the impact this reduction in staffing has had on the level of service provided to residents. Reductions in available numbers of prison firefighters likewise should be acknowledged.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R8:
The County Board of Supervisors should set an objective for County Fire to increase the number of volunteer firefighters by July 1, 2022, as well as a plan for use of the prison workforce or an alternative.This needs to be done in concert with a comprehensive resource plan for County Fire. (F9)
F10:
Roadside vegetation in rural areas of the County is not being cleared consistently which could potentially increase emergency response time, putting life and property in unnecessary danger. Furthermore, evacuations could be restricted as there is no rule or program that mandates that roads, even critical evacuation routes, be kept cleared meeting defensible space requirements. Alerts & Evacuation
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R9:
Each year, during the budget presentation, the County Board of Supervisors should require County Fire to provide a vegetation management plan, including a priority list of projects and a timeframe for their completion. (F1, F10, F16, F29)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
F11:
There are only approximately 17,000 accounts for the Santa Cruz County opt-in CodeRED™ emergency system, which implies that a significant portion of the County may not receive emergency alert messages, which potentially reduces residents’ opportunity to take action in a timely, life-saving manner.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
R17:
The County Office of Emergency Services should evaluate, quantify, and report to the County Board of Supervisors on the specifics of the public state of preparedness for a large-scale emergency such as wildfire by June, 2021. (F11, F23)
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:
Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs), have been deployed in other areas of the state and have proven effective tools in alerting residents in urban and rural areas to a wildfire. However, Santa Cruz County has no such devices, increasing the risk to County residents.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R18:
County Fire and the fire districts within the County should evaluate whether purchase of Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) would be beneficial in helping notify residents to evacuate in an emergency by December 31, 2020. (F12, F15, F17, F18)
F13:
High risk communities in the County are left unnecessarily vulnerable due to the lack of easily accessible, published information of refuge/assembly areas and structures.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
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:
Because the County does not publish a “shelter in place” plan, when a fire expands rapidly, residents cannot make informed decisions about whether to shelter in place or evacuate.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
R12:
The Santa Cruz County Office of Emergency Services should create and publish shelter in place plans, with the cooperation of all county fire protection districts and cities, and should inform citizens of safe building locations, and on what to expect and what to do in case of wildfire, by March 31, 2021. (F14)
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:
Unlike the City of Santa Cruz, the County does not publish emergency evacuation routes, purportedly to avoid having old or untimely information being followed in an emergency. The County therefore withholds revealing evacuation routes until an emergency is in progress, likely creating unnecessary risk and potential for chaos.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (5)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
R18:
County Fire and the fire districts within the County should evaluate whether purchase of Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) would be beneficial in helping notify residents to evacuate in an emergency by December 31, 2020. (F12, F15, F17, F18)
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)
F16:
In the Wildland Urban Interface zone, and in many town centers, traffic choke points exist, and in some instances have roadway obstacles to traffic flow such as overgrown vegetation, concrete medians, curbs, and lane reductions resulting in roads that are inadequate for mass evacuations.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R9:
Each year, during the budget presentation, the County Board of Supervisors should require County Fire to provide a vegetation management plan, including a priority list of projects and a timeframe for their completion. (F1, F10, F16, F29)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
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)
F17:
Santa Cruz County residents, and especially those living in District 5, would benefit if the 2019 San Lorenzo Evacuation Study performed by KLD Engineering was made available on a County agency web site and publicized.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R18:
County Fire and the fire districts within the County should evaluate whether purchase of Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) would be beneficial in helping notify residents to evacuate in an emergency by December 31, 2020. (F12, F15, F17, F18)
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)
F18:
Santa Cruz County has not sufficiently implemented lessons learned from Butte County's Paradise Fire on the importance of traffic management during an evacuation. It is imperative the County Office of Emergency Services ensures coordination between neighboring communities to manage traffic light sequencing and conversion of two-way roads into one-way evacuation routes, enabling mass evacuation during a wildfire. Education
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R18:
County Fire and the fire districts within the County should evaluate whether purchase of Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) would be beneficial in helping notify residents to evacuate in an emergency by December 31, 2020. (F12, F15, F17, F18)
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)
F19:
Wildfire preparedness informational materials are well done and public education is attempted by fire departments in the County, but fails to sufficiently reach and motivate residents to act.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R11:
The CAL FIRE Ready for Wildfire website should be actively promoted and shared within the community via all available means, including printed descriptive materials inserted into utility and property tax bills, by December 31, 2020. (F19–F21)
R15:
All fire districts in Santa Cruz County should coordinate with utility companies to provide information to residents, via information inserted in utility bill mailings, describing how to sign up for emergency notifications by December 31, 2020. (F19)
R16:
Fire departments throughout the County should take an active role in encouraging communities and neighborhoods to sign up for FireWise, and be measured on their success by their respective governing boards on an annual basis. (F19–F22)
F20:
The FireWise institution provides a valuable fire prevention program and, as of March 2020, there were eight FireWise communities registered in the County. Marin County, by contrast, with a similar population, has sixty registered communities, highlighting the need for more FireWise promotion and participation in Santa Cruz County.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R11:
The CAL FIRE Ready for Wildfire website should be actively promoted and shared within the community via all available means, including printed descriptive materials inserted into utility and property tax bills, by December 31, 2020. (F19–F21)
R16:
Fire departments throughout the County should take an active role in encouraging communities and neighborhoods to sign up for FireWise, and be measured on their success by their respective governing boards on an annual basis. (F19–F22)
F21:
The County Office of Emergency Services and fire agencies in the County encourage residents to be prepared for an emergency, however the passive mechanisms such as web sites used to encourage preparedness are not proving to be sufficient.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R11:
The CAL FIRE Ready for Wildfire website should be actively promoted and shared within the community via all available means, including printed descriptive materials inserted into utility and property tax bills, by December 31, 2020. (F19–F21)
R16:
Fire departments throughout the County should take an active role in encouraging communities and neighborhoods to sign up for FireWise, and be measured on their success by their respective governing boards on an annual basis. (F19–F22)
F22:
Property owners in the County are responsible for their own vegetation management, yet they are often not sufficiently educated about vegetation management practices, or do not have the capability, financial resources, or desire to create defensible space. Governance & Transparency
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R4:
The fire districts of Santa Cruz County should establish a plan by January 2021, to develop actionable Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP) that follow the framework established by the 2018 Santa Cruz County - San Mateo County CWPP. (F2, F5, F22)
R16:
Fire departments throughout the County should take an active role in encouraging communities and neighborhoods to sign up for FireWise, and be measured on their success by their respective governing boards on an annual basis. (F19–F22)
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Santa Cruz County, under the auspices of the Emergency Management Council (EMC) with LAFCO support, should study a governing structure that would tie all fire agencies in the County together with common leadership, objectives, sharing of data, and maximized use of resources. (F23, F25)
R14:
LAFCO should increase its comprehensive review of County fire district services from once every 10 years to once every five years. (F23, F25)
R17:
The County Office of Emergency Services should evaluate, quantify, and report to the County Board of Supervisors on the specifics of the public state of preparedness for a large-scale emergency such as wildfire by June, 2021. (F11, F23)
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R2:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE and County Fire to provide quarterly and annual reports to the County General Services Department with specified data and success metrics for each of the contract requirements, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
R3:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE, in conjunction with the General Services Department, to provide annual operations reviews with performance metrics and annual improvement objectives, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
Santa Cruz County, under the auspices of the Emergency Management Council (EMC) with LAFCO support, should study a governing structure that would tie all fire agencies in the County together with common leadership, objectives, sharing of data, and maximized use of resources. (F23, F25)
R14:
LAFCO should increase its comprehensive review of County fire district services from once every 10 years to once every five years. (F23, F25)
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R2:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE and County Fire to provide quarterly and annual reports to the County General Services Department with specified data and success metrics for each of the contract requirements, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
R3:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE, in conjunction with the General Services Department, to provide annual operations reviews with performance metrics and annual improvement objectives, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
R5:
Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 should include response time data, for each fire department in their annual reports, starting with the 2020 annual report. (F6, F26)
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
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).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R13:
LAFCO review of County fire districts should include the review of fire risk reduction plans and achievements, and LAFCO should perform this specific and focused review for all districts by June 2021. (F2, F28)
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R2:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE and County Fire to provide quarterly and annual reports to the County General Services Department with specified data and success metrics for each of the contract requirements, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
R3:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require CAL FIRE, in conjunction with the General Services Department, to provide annual operations reviews with performance metrics and annual improvement objectives, beginning with the current fiscal year. (F2, F24, F26, F29)
R9:
Each year, during the budget presentation, the County Board of Supervisors should require County Fire to provide a vegetation management plan, including a priority list of projects and a timeframe for their completion. (F1, F10, F16, F29)
R10:
Santa Cruz County and Cities should create and/or update Hazard Mitigation Plans by July 1, 2021. Any new or existing plans should be updated a minimum of every three years. All plans should address wildfire risk, evacuation and shelter in place plans, emergency alerts, vegetation management, and confirm compliance with California SB 821. (F1, F2, F10, F11, F14–F16, F29)
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
22 hallazgos
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
19 hallazgos
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F1:
The Santa Cruz City Schools Comprehensive School Safety Plans provide a best practice and is a useful resource for parents and the public.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
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.
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
Once USB drives or other equipment have been connected to the County network, do not reattach to the offline vote counting systems. 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:
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
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] 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. 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
Recomendaciones adicionales
10
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
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]
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 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. 2019 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.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
13 hallazgos
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
2 hallazgos
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
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.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F1:
The DeLaveaga Golf Course is underutilized and has the opportunity for generating increased revenue for the City of Santa Cruz and the Operator.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (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)
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
8 hallazgos
F1:
Contract personnel responsible for power operations at the County jail were unaware of Sheriff’s Policy 403, which compromises the ability to reach a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the County’s General Services Department and the Sheriff’s Department for operational roles and responsibilities.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Sheriff’s Department, in conjunction with the County General Services Department, should analyze and document plans to comply with stated policies by December 31, 2020. (F1, F3)
F2:
Some personnel with power infrastructure responsibility at the County jail had never read or reviewed the After-Action Report, so they were unaware of the actions they needed to take.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
The Sheriff’s Department leadership and the County Administrative Officer and General Services Director should work together to provide regular communications as soon as possible with all personnel (detention, general services, leadership) who have a need to know, to provide status, project planning, and goal completion. (F2, F4)
F3:
While an emergency generator has been procured, adequate testing of methods of connection and operation has not been done yet.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
The Sheriff’s Department, in conjunction with the County General Services Department, should analyze and document plans to comply with stated policies by December 31, 2020. (F1, F3)
R2:
The Sheriff’s Department and the County General Services Department should have a documented Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) by December 31, 2020 for roles and responsibilities, particularly and specifically in the event of emergencies. (F3)
F4:
Ongoing communications of status and progress before, during and after an emergency are not in evidence between Jail personnel and County General Services personnel.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
The Sheriff’s Department leadership and the County Administrative Officer and General Services Director should work together to provide regular communications as soon as possible with all personnel (detention, general services, leadership) who have a need to know, to provide status, project planning, and goal completion. (F2, F4)
F5:
The County was non-compliant with policy regarding emergency backup at the jail and remained non-compliant for months, including fueling, maintenance, testing, and emergency backup power generation.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The Sheriff’s Department and the County General Services Department should develop a document, updated quarterly, which shows compliance with Policy 403. The signed confirmation should be delivered to the Board of Supervisors by December 31, 2020. (F5, F6)
F6:
No policies and procedures were identified depicting response timeframes and what to do when a response is required during an emergency; no policies or procedures are documented depicting the response or monitoring responsibility of on-call staff at the County’s correctional facilities.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The Sheriff’s Department and the County General Services Department should develop a document, updated quarterly, which shows compliance with Policy 403. The signed confirmation should be delivered to the Board of Supervisors by December 31, 2020. (F5, F6)
F7:
The failure to escalate critical issues by key County General Services and Sheriff’s department personnel is very concerning. Procedures for escalation are lacking and this creates unwanted risk.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The Sheriff’s Department, in conjunction with the County General Services Department, should develop and document policies and procedures for escalation of critical issues by December 31, 2020. (F7)
F8:
Robust risk management and mitigation is lacking in the County and correctional facility organizations.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
The Board of Supervisors should direct the County Administrative Officer to immediately define a risk management position, hire a qualified individual, and review all risk areas, mitigation plans and capabilities with the Board of Supervisors by June 30, 2021. (F8)
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
8 hallazgos
F1:
The City of Santa Cruz Fire Department has not adequately inspected all schools, hotels, apartments, and licensed residential care facilities for fire and safety per California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should comply, as soon as possible, with state health codes for fire and safety inspections and reporting. Specifically, California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b). (F1–F4, F8)
R2:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should, as soon as possible, ensure inspection plans reflect all facilities that fall under California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13156.3, and 171921(b). (F1–F5,F8)
R6:
The County of Santa Cruz County Office of Education should by January 2021 begin reviewing fire inspection reports for the schools in their jurisdiction annually at a minimum and ensure that School District leadership do the same. (F1–F5, F8)
F2:
The City of Watsonville Fire Department has not adequately inspected all schools, hotels, apartments, and licensed residential care facilities for fire and safety per California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should comply, as soon as possible, with state health codes for fire and safety inspections and reporting. Specifically, California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b). (F1–F4, F8)
R2:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should, as soon as possible, ensure inspection plans reflect all facilities that fall under California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13156.3, and 171921(b). (F1–F5,F8)
R6:
The County of Santa Cruz County Office of Education should by January 2021 begin reviewing fire inspection reports for the schools in their jurisdiction annually at a minimum and ensure that School District leadership do the same. (F1–F5, F8)
F3:
The Felton Fire District has not adequately accounted for the inspection of all schools, hotels, apartments, and licensed residential care facilities for fire and safety per California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R1:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should comply, as soon as possible, with state health codes for fire and safety inspections and reporting. Specifically, California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b). (F1–F4, F8)
R2:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should, as soon as possible, ensure inspection plans reflect all facilities that fall under California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13156.3, and 171921(b). (F1–F5,F8)
R3:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should, by January 2021, publish a summary of annual inspection
R6:
The County of Santa Cruz County Office of Education should by January 2021 begin reviewing fire inspection reports for the schools in their jurisdiction annually at a minimum and ensure that School District leadership do the same. (F1–F5, F8)
F4:
Santa Cruz County Fire has not adequately inspected all schools, hotels, and apartments for fire and safety per California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should comply, as soon as possible, with state health codes for fire and safety inspections and reporting. Specifically, California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b). (F1–F4, F8)
R2:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should, as soon as possible, ensure inspection plans reflect all facilities that fall under California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13156.3, and 171921(b). (F1–F5,F8)
R6:
The County of Santa Cruz County Office of Education should by January 2021 begin reviewing fire inspection reports for the schools in their jurisdiction annually at a minimum and ensure that School District leadership do the same. (F1–F5, F8)
F5:
Fire Agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County have not adequately reported inspection performance and the inherent risk associated with a performance gap to residents and leadership external to the governing body.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R2:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should, as soon as possible, ensure inspection plans reflect all facilities that fall under California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13156.3, and 171921(b). (F1–F5,F8)
R6:
The County of Santa Cruz County Office of Education should by January 2021 begin reviewing fire inspection reports for the schools in their jurisdiction annually at a minimum and ensure that School District leadership do the same. (F1–F5, F8)
F6:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County would benefit by sharing technology and processes and at times personnel, in fulfilling fire inspection requirements.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The County and City fire agencies should amend their mutual aid agreements to provide for sharing of technology and inspection resources by June 30, 2021. (F6)
F7:
Reporting gaps in fire inspection performance to a governing body annually at a time when that governing body is completing its budgeting process makes making budget adjustments prior to budget adoption unnecessarily challenging and may result in delay.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The County of Santa Cruz and the City Fire Departments in the County should notify appropriate County or City leadership of the resources necessary to be compliant with inspection requirements early enough to be addressed during the agency’s annual budgeting process. (F7)
F8:
Scotts Valley Fire District resolution 2020-2 is at risk of being non-compliant based on a survey of businesses and organizations consistent with California annual inspection code requirements.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should comply, as soon as possible, with state health codes for fire and safety inspections and reporting. Specifically, California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13146.3, 13146.4, and 171921(b). (F1–F4, F8)
R2:
Fire agencies serving the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County should, as soon as possible, ensure inspection plans reflect all facilities that fall under California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2, 13156.3, and 171921(b). (F1–F5,F8)
R6:
The County of Santa Cruz County Office of Education should by January 2021 begin reviewing fire inspection reports for the schools in their jurisdiction annually at a minimum and ensure that School District leadership do the same. (F1–F5, F8)