Santa Cruz County 2022-2023 - California Grand Jury Reports

From the annual report

The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.

📑 Year-End Report

View the full annual report (PDF)

The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.

Individual reports (11)

June 22, 2022 — How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds

25 páginas 6 hallazgos 3 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 6 hallazgos

F1: The plain language of Measure S required use of Measure S funds for the modernization, upgrade, and repair of the existing local library branches—not community centers.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6)

F2: The Santa Cruz Public Libraries website states that Measure S funds would be used to address the “most urgent needs” identified in the Facilities Master Plan, which stated no new library branches were needed and focused only on the needs of the existing ten library branches—likely misleading voters.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: In the case of any future ballot measures, the SantaCruz Public Libraries should inform voters of prior commitments of ballot funds, such as the County Board of Supervisors’ commitment of Measure S funds to Live Oak. (F2, F3, F5)

F3: Voter materials disclosed how Measure S funds would be divided among the Santa Cruz Public Libraries’ Member Agencies, but did not disclose the allocation of $5 million to a Live Oak Library Annex within the Live Oak Community Center—likely misleading voters. The Annex Is Not a Library

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F4: Following the dissolution of redevelopment agencies in California, County Parks was left without a ready source of capital funds needed to fulfill the vision of the Live Oak Community Center as the heart of Live Oak, and Measure S filled the void.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F5: The Annex is an expansion of the Live Oak Community Center and not an expansion of the Live Oak Branch Library.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

F6: The County’s decision to use Measure S funds for the Live Oak Library Annex in the Live Oak Community Center will impact the Santa Cruz Public Libraries operating budget.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R3: In the case of any future ballot measures, the SantaCruz Public Libraries should inform voters of the impact of facility expansion on its future operating budgets. (F6)

June 20, 2022 — Words Matter Did Measure G Mislead Voters? “The problem [with ballot proposals] is that local officials are so vested in

30 páginas 9 hallazgos 7 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 9 hallazgos

F1: Measure G’s ballot language made the tax appear to be a special tax: the language emphasized multiple services that Measure G could be used for, which overshadowed the final clause, “and other general county services.”

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: The County’s ballot language for a revenue measure should clearly state whether the County Government’s use of the funds will be restricted to certain uses (special revenue), or is available for any legal purpose (general revenue). (F1)

F2: County staff did not have compelling reasons to include several provisions contained in its consultant’s proposed Measure G ballot language—specifically the annual audit, citizens oversight, and 12-year expiration date—which also made Measure G appear to be a special tax.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: The County’s ballot language for general revenue measures should only include accountability provisions when the provisions will provide transparency beyond what the law already requires. (F2, F3)

F3: The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors approved the Measure G ballot language at its August 7, 2018, meeting without seeking clarification as to how the provisions for an “annual audit” and “independent citizens oversight” would operate. Impartial Analysis

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F4: The impartial analysis did not plainly state that the Measure G funds would be general revenue that could be used for any legal government purpose.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: The County Counsel’s impartial analysis of a revenue measure should clearly state whether the County Government’s use of the funds will be restricted to certain uses (special revenue), or is available for any legal purpose (general revenue). (F4)

F5: The impartial analysis did not inform voters that the County Board of Supervisors had adopted a resolution setting budget priorities for the use of Measure G revenue that was quite narrow compared to the broad range of proposed uses stated in the ballot.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

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 impartial analysis failed to explain how the “annual audit” or the “independent citizens oversight'' would be carried out. Citizens Oversight

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

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: The Measure G Financial Summary, which is included in the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22, can be expanded with detail showing Measure G revenues and expenditures to support the Measure G independent citizens oversight provisions.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

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. Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days

F8: The County Government’s current reliance on over 50 percent of Measure G revenue to support ongoing and recurring expenses for the County’s provision of essential services means the Measure G 12-year expiration date may present a serious risk to the County’s future fiscal health.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F9: Other California cities and counties have demonstrated that Santa Cruz County can honor its promise for citizens oversight of Measure G expenditures.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

May 24, 2022 — Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience

37 páginas 12 hallazgos 3 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 12 hallazgos

F1: If extended drought conditions lead the City of Santa Cruz to execute Stage 5 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, it will have extreme economic impacts on all residents throughout the County.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

R1: By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought-resilience project planning and execution. (F1–F6, F8–F12)

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)

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: There is an urgent need to create a county-wide drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

F3: Interdistrict water-sharing plans spanning North County and Mid-County that could benefit all residents have existed since 2015 and deserve to be accelerated. Elements of a Solution

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

F4: Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

F5: The City of Santa Cruz’s completion of the water rights revision project is a critical element of enabling district collaboration in support of county-level drought resilience.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

F6: Limited interdistrict water transfers have been achieved and serve as proof of concept.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

F7: Existing City of Watsonville and City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are only partially utilized to address passive well resting and saltwater intrusion issues. Agency Capabilities

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F8: Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

F9: Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

F10: The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

F11: The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F12: There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

May 17, 2022 — Honoring Commitments to the Public County Agency Actions in Response to

18 páginas 7 hallazgos 7 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 7 hallazgos

F1: Government agencies made all required responses to the 2018–2019 reports within the requested time frame.

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: Santa Cruz County Probation—Officers Inadequately Equipped and At Risk 6 Key Findings 6 Key Recommendations 7 Responses 7 2021 Update: Were Commitments Kept? 8

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)

R3: Library IT does privacy audits with all third-party vendors Addresses (including those provided by a library consortia) asking each a Recommendation 4 list of vendor security questions and publishing their privacy statements for the public to review. 2021 Update: Were Commitments Kept? We commend Santa Cruz Public Libraries’ response to the Grand Jury’s recommendations. In addition to updating general privacy policies, the Santa Cruz Public Libraries put a moratorium on any additional use of Gale Analytics On Demand software in 2018. Libraries’ leadership voted to end use of the product and delete all files in January 2019.[7] 2. Santa Cruz County Probation—Officers Inadequately Equipped and At Risk Summary: The role of the Probation Department (Department) in Santa Cruz County has changed significantly in recent years due to legislation and voter-approved propositions. As a result, prison inmates with a higher level of criminal sophistication are frequently released on probation. Many of them have prior felony criminal histories. These persons can require probation officer supervision at the community level. This Grand Jury report identified concerns about the dangers and unnecessary risks Adult Division Deputy Probation Officers (Probation Officers) face in supervising some high-risk offenders. The report found that inadequate or faulty safety equipment, lack of training, limited law enforcement support, and lack of an armed unit all contributed to an unsafe working environment.[8] The Grand Jury concluded its report with five findings and made four recommendations that required responses. The Key Findings and Key Recommendations sections, below, provide context for the Response section. The Response section describes agency responses to the investigation report. In some cases, marked with an asterisk (*), information is edited for clarity or brevity. Key Findings Probation Officers’ lack of safety equipment impedes their ability to do Finding 1 their assigned field visits without jeopardizing their own safety. The Department collects and stores, but does not track, serious incident Finding 2 reports involving Probation Officers with offenders. The Department meets the minimum state requirements for annual Finding 3 Probation Officers training, but does not provide sufficient safety training for Probation Officers in the field. Law enforcement is not always available to accompany Probation Finding 4 Officers in high-risk situations, resulting in fewer contact visits by Probation Officers. The failure of the Department to include an armed unit supporting Finding 5 Probation Officers increases safety risks to Probation Officers in the field. Key Recommendations The Department should provide Probation Officers with Recommendation 1 standardized safety gear (individually fitted vests, functioning radios, tasers, OC spray, identifiable clothing, and Narcan) for their field visits. The Department should provide all Probation Officers with Recommendation 2 mandatory initial and ongoing field safety training in collaboration with the Department’s Safety Committee. The Department should coordinate with local law enforcement Recommendation 3 to develop policies and procedures for law enforcement officers to accompany Probation Officers during field visits. The Department should commission a needs assessment by Recommendation 4 an independent consultant to ascertain the potential harm to unarmed officers doing field work with high-risk offenders, with a focus on developing an armed unit. Responses[9] The Sheriff and the Chief Probation Officer did not agree Addresses Finding 1 that sworn staff were inadequately equipped. They added that tasers would be implemented in 2019 and that in FY 19/20, the department will be ordering individually fitted vests over time as fiscally allowable. Narcan is available for checkout as of July 2019. The Chief Probation Officer responded that the Incident Addresses Finding 2 Report form has been enhanced to include more detailed areas for follow-up and debriefing when needed (with a Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threats analysis model noted for consistency in response). In August 2018, the Probation Department implemented a Addresses Finding 3 Pilot Field Training Program. This is facilitated by Probation Officer II/III staff who are trained as Field Training Officers.* Addresses Finding 4 The Sheriff and the Chief Probation Officer stated that law enforcement officers are always available to assist probation officers with high-risk work, but conceded that there may be significant wait times based on other public safety priorities. The Chief Probation Officer stated that the Department Addresses was not aware of any research supporting the arming of Recommendation 4 probation officers.* Additional information[10] 2021 Update: Were Commitments Kept? The Sheriff and the Chief Probation Officer agreed to assign a full-time deputy to the Probation Department to assist probation officers with higher-risk assignments. These assignments include searches, arrests, transportation, and other work prioritized by the Probation Department. The County Board of Supervisors approved funding for one additional deputy for this purpose for the 2019–2020 fiscal year budget. The Sheriff and the Chief Probation Officer will work together toward implementation. The assigned deputy was scheduled to start with the Probation Department in September 2019. As of November 15, 2021, the County reports that the Probation Department has a full-time deputy assigned to the department to assist with higher-risk assignments.[11] 3. Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders Summary: Santa Cruz County (County) has contracts with criminal defense attorneys who in turn represent accused criminal defendants who cannot afford to pay for their own defense. These contracts are called the County’s public defense contracts. This report investigated two closely related topics concerning the administration and fiscal management of the public defense contracts: ● Gaps in management and accountability of public defense contracts for services provided by private sector defense attorneys which have led to excessive costs. ● How County practices and processes for contract creation, tracking, and reporting obscured the scope and cost of complex contracts, such as the public defense contracts. For almost fifty years the County’s main public defense contract was with the law firm of Biggam, Christensen and Minsloff (Biggam). In addition to the contract with Biggam, the County has contracts with two other private law firms that specialize in criminal defense. These additional contracts are needed to avoid conflicts in having Biggam represent multiple defendants charged in the same case (Conflict Attorneys).[12] The Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts report focused on the cost of the County’s public defense contracts, which had risen more than the rate of inflation over the prior 20 years. The Grand Jury considered whether caseloads, number of felony jury trials, or minimum staffing requirements explained the increase. The Grand Jury also investigated whether the public defense contracts followed the County’s contract rules and processes and whether the County administered the public defense contracts in accordance with the County’s standard contract practices. The Grand Jury found that the County’s management of the public defense contracts did not provide adequate oversight of the services and costs. The Grand Jury also found that the Board of Supervisors approved increases to contract payments and provision of complimentary office space without a clear understanding of the true cost of the services, or why the costs were increasing.[13] The Key Findings and Key Recommendations sections provide context for the Response section. The Response section describes agency responses to the investigation report. For items marked with an asterisk (*), information has been edited for clarity or brevity. Findings and Recommendations where the agencies declined to take action, or which do not seem to the Grand Jury to be critical to improving government functions at this time, are not included. The investigation produced 12

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.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R4: in the Santa Cruz County Probation—Officers Inadequately Equipped and At Risk Report, p. 11. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/Proba tionCPOResponse.pdf#page=12 11. Confidential Grand Jury document. 12. 2018–2019 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury. June 27, 2019. Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts, p. 3. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/Public DefenseContracts.pdf#page=3 13. 2018–2019 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury. June 27, 2019. Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/Public DefenseContracts.pdf 14. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Responses to the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf 15. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Response to

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 (1)

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

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 (1)

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 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. 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

Reducing Our Community’s Risk from Wildfire It Will Take Money, Time, and Serious Cooperation Santa Cruz and San Mateo

33 páginas 10 hallazgos 7 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 10 hallazgos

F1: Vegetation reduction must become a major priority for the County to adequately protect communities, critical infrastructures, and ingress/egress routes from increasing wildfire risk.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

R3: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should require County Fire to report directly to the Board of Supervisors on vegetation reduction planning and execution every six months. (F1, F9)

R4: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should require the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience to report directly to the Board of Supervisors on vegetation reduction planning and execution every six months. (F1, F10)

R5: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should allocate funding for the strategic plan and community outreach recommended in this report. (F1, F2, F3,

F2: Currently, there is not a countywide strategy for prioritizing vegetation-reduction projects.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

R1: By September 30, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should designate the appropriate lead agency to work with other local fire agencies to produce and publish the County Strategic Plan for Safe Movement and Community Protection in the Wildland Urban Interface by June 30, 2023. This document should include up-to-date wildfire risk levels across the County, along with prioritization and selection criteria for projects, and how completing them will reduce the wildfire risk to County residents. The criteria should emphasize public safety, including safe movement, community protection, and infrastructure fire resilience. (F1, F2,

R5: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should allocate funding for the strategic plan and community outreach recommended in this report. (F1, F2, F3,

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. Board of Supervisors’ Response to Recommendation 9: REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS: There is currently no funding for a vegetation-management plan for the County Fire Department. We currently coordinate with CAL FIRE on a priority list of projects that have timelines related to available funding. In order to implement such a process will require additional analysis and potential funding. To summarize the position of the Board of Supervisors two years ago: 1. Property owners are responsible for vegetation reduction on their property, not the County. 2. The County could improve its vegetation reduction activity on County-maintained roads. 3. County Fire does not have a plan. It coordinates with CAL FIRE to identify priority projects. 4. Because there is no funding for vegetation-management planning, the planning isn’t being done. 5. Priority projects are only done after grant funding has been obtained. Santa Cruz County Fire (County Fire) is Santa Cruz County’s fire department, discussed later in this report. CAL FIRE is the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, also discussed later in this report. The Grand Jury determined that vegetation reduction along roadways is a major problem that the County must lead in solving. We wanted to understand what is really needed to protect our community from future wildfires, who is responsible for achieving it, and the County’s role in ensuring this work gets done. Protecting Communities from Wildfires The highest priority areas for vegetation reduction are those that are located within, or are adjacent to, the WUI, especially high-density, special needs, or disadvantaged communities.[14] [15] Within the WUI, vegetation reduction addresses the following high-priority community protection elements: ● Costly and difficult to rebuild public infrastructure ● Above-ground utility transmission lines for water, gas, and electricity ● Communications infrastructure, such as cell towers ● Water infrastructure, such as pump stations, water tanks, pipelines, and water treatment plants ● Communities ● Schools, hospitals, and government or commercial buildings ● Homes and agricultural buildings ● Transport and natural resources ● Ridges, truck trails, access roads, and evacuation routes ● Areas where fires pose a considerable threat to water supply and water quality Beyond the WUI, where infrastructure supporting nearby communities exists, that infrastructure must be protected. During the CZU Fire, communications infrastructure failed, limiting the ability to warn residents to evacuate. Protecting this infrastructure is critical.[4] The San Lorenzo Valley Water District also suffered significant damage to above-ground pipelines.[16] Much other essential infrastructure was damaged, slowing recovery operations. Creating fuel breaks is a well-understood and commonly applied vegetation reduction method. There are two types of fuel breaks: ● A fuel break is a gap in vegetation created by removing most of the vegetation in an area to prevent the spread of a fire, as shown in Figure 3. ● A shaded fuel break is created by the thinning of dense tree cover and removal of lower-level vegetation. Less material is removed than a full fuel break, as shown in Figure 4. Fuel breaks are more effective than shaded fuel breaks, but are generally used away from residential areas because of their aesthetics. Fuel breaks are often employed to protect critical infrastructure. A large fuel break constructed by the University of California at Santa Cruz enabled firefighters to halt the advance of the CZU Fire and protected the campus.[17] Another large fuel break was constructed during the CZU Fire in Henry Cowell State Park along a heavily forested ridge to prevent the fire from reaching San Lorenzo Valley High School and Highway 9. Shaded fuel breaks are frequently used along roadways, particularly those that may become evacuation routes in the event of a wildfire. Shaded fuel breaks are cheaper and easier to maintain, are less detrimental to sensitive habitat, and often have more community support.[18] Figure 3. Construction of a fuel break along a ridge[19] Figure 4. Construction of a shaded fuel break along an existing road[19] Two Major Elements to Protecting Our Communities Ensuring Safe Movement During Wildfires Providing safe evacuation routes, shelter-in-place locations, and access routes for fire crews enables safe movement for affected residents and emergency services. Safe movement is the responsibility of the state and local agencies described in

F3: County residents are not sufficiently informed of vegetation-management strategy, planning, and implementation.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)

R2: The production of the strategic plan for vegetation management should be visible to County residents, and public opinion should be sought and included in the final document. (F3, F5, F7)

R5: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should allocate funding for the strategic plan and community outreach recommended in this report. (F1, F2, F3,

R6: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should direct County Fire, with support from the Resource Conservation District and the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience, to report annually to the public on progress toward published goals for improving safe movement and community protection. The first report should be published by June 30, 2023. (F3, F7, F8) Commendation C1. The Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County is commended for its successful efforts in obtaining significant grants for vegetation reduction. Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By

F4: No single agency guides the County vegetation-reduction programs and projects, a situation that contributes to the observed lack of strategic planning. Funding Vegetation Reduction through the Grants Process

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

F5: The grants process is competitive, fragmented, and opaque, and lacks the published priorities and governance to ensure the money is well spent.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: The production of the strategic plan for vegetation management should be visible to County residents, and public opinion should be sought and included in the final document. (F3, F5, F7)

F6: Santa Cruz County is obtaining significant vegetation reduction funding through the grants process but not sufficient to complete high-priority vegetation reduction areas in a reasonable time.

F7: County residents do not have easy access to grant prioritization and project selection criteria. County Fire Organization

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R2: The production of the strategic plan for vegetation management should be visible to County residents, and public opinion should be sought and included in the final document. (F3, F5, F7)

F8: Neither County Fire nor the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience have staff or funding that are charged with creating, managing, and reporting on vegetation-reduction strategy, planning, and execution for the benefit of County residents.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F9: The County Fire/CAL FIRE Chief reporting to General Services does not give vegetation reduction sufficient priority and visibility.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should require County Fire to report directly to the Board of Supervisors on vegetation reduction planning and execution every six months. (F1, F9)

F10: The Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience reporting to the County Administrative Officer does not give vegetation reduction sufficient priority and visibility.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

📋Code Compliance Division - Out of Compliance It’s not easy, but it shouldn’t be impossible

7 hallazgos 12 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 7 hallazgos

F1: Understaffing over a long period of time in the Code Compliance Department means

Página 180

F2: The Code Compliance Department and the Planning Department do not routinely

Página 180

F3: The Code Compliance Department of the Planning Department does not have

Página 180

F4: At the present time the Planning Department has limited access for the public. It is

Página 180

F5: There is a persistent public perception of inconsistent interpretation of code. The

Página 180

F6: The Conflict of Interest policy does not include conflicts regarding family, friends, or

Página 180

F7: The Planning Department is by its nature supposed to be a customer-focused

Página 180

Recomendaciones adicionales 12

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: The Planning Department should fill vacant code compliance positions by the

Página 180

R2: The Personnel Department should reclassify the job description and requirements

Página 180

R3: The Planning Department should, by the end of 2023, determine what steps and

Página 180

R4: The policies and procedures manuals for the Planning Department and Code

Página 181

R5: The Code Compliance Department should create a log system that ensures that

Página 181

R6: Data regarding public complaints about Code Compliance Investigators actions

Página 181

R7: The Code Compliance Department should institute monthly staff meetings by

Página 181

R8: The Code Compliance Department should formalize training and staff

Página 181

R9: The Planning Department should increase the hours that are open to the public

Página 181

R10: The Code Compliance Department should add recommended time frames for the

Página 181

R11: Conflict of Interest policy should be rewritten to include relationships of a

Página 181

R12: The Board of Supervisors and Community Development and Infrastructure

Página 181

📋Cyber Threat Preparedness Phishing and Passwords and Ransomware, Oh My!

23 hallazgos 24 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 23 hallazgos

F1: Funds are focused on improving conditions of well-being for community members

Página 12

F2: A hybrid approach is administered to support both broad-based service programs

Página 12

F3: There is good diversity of eligible applicants: Non-profit 501(c)(3) agencies,

Página 12

F4: The program is well coordinated, with County and City staff partnering to review

Página 12

F5: A clear outline of the RFP is available to the applicants, with an understanding of

Página 12

F6: The County and City provides a comprehensive review of the process which

Página 12

F7: The City of Santa Cruz does not have a Cybersecurity Policy, suggesting that

Página 28

F8: The City of Santa Cruz does not have an Incident Response Plan, and this

Página 28

F9: Santa Cruz participates in some information sharing organizations such as the

Página 28

F10: After recently expanding its IT Department, the City of Watsonville has improved

Página 29

F11: The City does not have an individual whose primary responsibility is

Página 29

F12: Watsonville does not have a Cybersecurity Plan that defines security policies,

Página 29

F13: Watsonville does not have an Incident Response Plan that provides detailed

Página 29

F14: Watsonville participates in some regional information sharing forums, but it does

Página 29

F15: Although Scotts Valley’s managed service provider is very knowledgeable and

Página 30

F16: Scotts Valley does not have a current Cybersecurity Plan that defines security

Página 30

F17: Scotts Valley does not have a current Incident Response Plan, which could

Página 30

F18: Scotts Valley does not participate in any cybersecurity information sharing groups

Página 30

F19: With one individual responsible for IT services, Capitola does not allocate

Página 30

F20: The City of Capitola does not have a robust cybersecurity training program, nor

Página 30

F21: The City of Capitola does not have a Cybersecurity Plan to address cybersecurity

Página 31

F22: The City of Capitola does not have an Incident Response Plan, which could

Página 31

F23: Capitola does not participate in any cyber-focused information sharing groups,

Página 31

Recomendaciones adicionales 24

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: Santa Cruz County should prepare and implement a Cybersecurity Plan by the

Página 27

R2: By the end of 2023, the county should revise and expand its Incident Response

Página 27

R3: The County’s information sharing efforts should be expanded to ensure fulsome

Página 27

R4: The City of Santa Cruz should prioritize filling its vacant IT department positions

Página 28

R5: By Fall 2023, Santa Cruz should identify and implement creative approaches to

Página 28

R6: By Fall 2023, the City of Santa Cruz should assign one individual responsible for

Página 28

R7: By the end of 2023 or sooner, the City of Santa Cruz should develop and

Página 28

R8: By the end of 2023 or sooner, the City should complete an Incident Response

Página 28

R9: Once the IT Department has adequate staffing and by the end of 2023, it should

Página 29

R10: Watsonville should conduct an evaluation of its recently expanded IT

Página 29

R11: Given the size of Watsonville, the City should have a dedicated position for

Página 29

R12: By early 2024 or sooner, Watsonville should prepare and implement a

Página 29

R13: By early 2024 or sooner, Watsonville should prepare and implement an Incident

Página 29

R14: Upon completion of IT structural upgrades and a higher level of cyber maturity,

Página 29

R15: By mid-2023, Scotts Valley should assign a city official as the lead for

Página 30

R16: Working with its IT contractor, by Fall 2023, Scotts Valley should write and

Página 30

R17: By Fall 2023, Scotts Valley should write an Incident Response Plan that clearly

Página 30

R18: Scotts Valley should participate in local, regional, and state cybersecurity

Página 30

R19: By Fall 2023, Capitola should hire a full-time IT Director to replace the IT Director

Página 31

R20: The City should develop a more robust cybersecurity training and phishing

Página 31

R21: Capitola should establish and implement a Cybersecurity Plan by the end of

Página 31

R22: By Fall 2023 Capitola should prepare an Incident Response Plan that provides

Página 31

R23: When appropriately resourced to monitor cyber threats, and by the end of 2023,

Página 31

R24: By mid-2023, Capitola city management should raise the priority it assigns to

Página 31

📋Diagnosing the Crisis in Behavioral Health Underfunded, Understaffed & Overworked

14 hallazgos 10 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 14 hallazgos

F1: The chronic understaffing in the Behavioral Health Division (BHD) and their

Página 136

F2: The County Personnel Department has been slow to respond to the chronic

Página 136

F3: Both the Personnel Department and the Behavioral Health Division do not have

Página 136

F4: The Crisis Stabilization Program (CSP) has been diverting patients experiencing

Página 136

F5: The limited hours that the Mobile Emergency Response Team and Mobile

Página 136

F6: An inadequate number of beds at the Psychiatric Healthcare Facility (PHF)

Página 137

F7: The County plans to close the current Crisis Stabilization Program (CSP) to

Página 137

F8: The large number of high cost beneficiaries results in additional demands on an

Página 137

F9: Data security is an important issue, including the security of voter registration data and it is unknown if measures have been taken in this area.

Página 117

F10: The lack of step-down care for patients completing both inpatient and outpatient

Página 137

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R10: The Santa Cruz County Clerk should outline steps that have been taken to make voter registration data more secure by September 30, 2023. (F9) Required

F11: The high rate of homelessness and Substance Use Disorder in the County

Página 137

F12: The Behavioral Health Division is insufficiently funded and staffed to provide

Página 137

F13: Outreach to the Latino/a community is insufficient because of the lack of bilingual

Página 137

F14: The current pay differential for bilingual staff is insufficient to attract and retain

Página 137

Recomendaciones adicionales 9

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: Competitive salaries and hiring incentives should be put in place for all vacant

Página 138

R2: The County Personnel Department should plan to do an analysis of the hiring

Página 138

R3: The County Personnel Department should institute an annual competitive

Página 138

R4: The County Personnel Department should develop connections and internships

Página 138

R5: To eliminate the frequent offloading of the Behavioral Health Division (BHD)

Página 138

R6: The Behavioral Health Division should improve the services provided by the

Página 138

R7: The Behavioral Health Division should ensure that there is a smooth transition

Página 138

R8: The Behavioral Health Division should request sufficient funding from the County

Página 139

R9: The City of Scotts Valley should verify that their commitment to redesign their

Página 117

📋Envisioning the Future of our Jails We Continue to “Kick The Can”

10 hallazgos 7 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 10 hallazgos

F1: Permanent mandatory overtime for Corrections Officers has a negative effect on

Página 53

F2: Overcrowding at the Main Jail would be alleviated if the Blaine Street Women’s

Página 53

F3: Keeping women who do not need to be in a high security facility in the Main Jail

Página 53

F4: Reopening Blaine Street and the second unit at Rountree would give the Sheriff’s

Página 54

F5: Lack of programming at the Main Jail is bad for inmate welfare, both their mental

Página 54

F6: Programs such as those run by the Public Defender’s Office and CAFES that

Página 54

F7: Lack of continuing care for released inmates, most especially those with mental

Página 54

F8: Some continuing care does exist, but is massively underfunded, especially for

Página 54

F9: The Main Jail is old, has been overcrowded, and does not meet current

Página 54

F10: The Main Jail might be adequate for incarcerating inmates who need to be in a

Página 54

Recomendaciones adicionales 7

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: In the next budget cycle the Board of Supervisors should allocate more funding

Página 54

R2: The Blaine Street Women’s Jail should be reopened as soon as practical, but

Página 54

R3: After Blaine Street, the second unit at Rountree should be reopened as soon as

Página 54

R4: Programming at the Main Jail, both that intended to stimulate and entertain

Página 54

R5: The Public Defender’s Office should receive funding in the next budget cycle to

Página 54

R6: In the next budget cycle, County Behavioral Health should be funded to

Página 54

R7: The Sheriff’s Office should commission a study to determine the most effective

Página 55

📋Housing Our Workers Essential Workers Need Affordable Housing!

13 hallazgos 20 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 13 hallazgos

F1: While all city and county planning departments have demonstrated a good

Página 80

F2: With the planned growth of UCSC to 28,000 students, the potential demand for

Página 80

F3: The County of Santa Cruz has identified several sites for higher density housing,

Página 80

F4: Capitola has made little progress towards achieving housing goals, particularly

Página 80

F5: Capitola has focused primarily on streamlining the construction of ADUs as a

Página 80

F6: Capitola and the County of Santa Cruz need to work together to facilitate

Página 80

F7: The City of Capitola has made little progress towards facilitating the development

Página 80

F8: The City of Capitola claims to have significantly fewer resources to attract

Página 80

F9: The City of Scotts Valley has facilitated the building of market rate housing in

Página 80

F10: The City of Scotts Valley has made little progress towards developing the Town

Página 81

F11: The City of Scotts Valley claims to have significantly fewer resources to attract

Página 81

F12: While all local municipalities have voiced support for prioritizing housing for local

Página 81

F13: All municipalities are trying to identify and facilitate the building of housing

Página 81

Recomendaciones adicionales 20

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should identify enough parcels of land,

Página 81

R2: By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should show significant progress towards

Página 81

R3: By the end of 2023, the City of Capitola should demonstrate a plan to work with

Página 81

R4: By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should develop clear, measureable

Página 81

R5: By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should demonstrate that they have

Página 81

R6: By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should identify enough parcels of

Página 81

R7: By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should show significant progress

Página 82

R8: By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate a plan to work

Página 82

R9: By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should develop clear, measureable

Página 82

R10: By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate that they have

Página 82

R11: By the end of 2023 the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate progress

Página 82

R12: By the end of 2023 the County of Santa Cruz should develop clear, measureable

Página 82

R13: By the end of 2023, the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate a plan to work

Página 82

R14: By the end of 2023, the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate progress in

Página 82

R15: By the end of 2023 the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate that they have

Página 82

R16: By the end of 2023 the City of Santa Cruz should demonstrate that they have

Página 82

R17: By the end of 2023, the City of Santa Cruz should develop clear, measureable

Página 82

R18: By the end of 2023, the City of Santa Cruz should demonstrate progress in

Página 83

R19: By the end of 2023 the City of Watsonville should demonstrate that they have

Página 83

R20: By the end of 2023, the City of Watsonville should develop clear, measureable

Página 83

📋Surveillance State in Santa Cruz County Who surveils those who surveil us?

8 hallazgos 9 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 8 hallazgos

F1: The Sheriff’s Office documenting minimal use of Amazon Ring, and informing the

Página 162

F2: The Sheriff’s Office indicating no use of automated license plate readers updates

Página 162

F3: Conflicting information on records retention within Policy 423 (Body Worn

Página 162

F4: The Sheriff’s Office’s lack of documentation specific to the Cellebrite Mobile

Página 162

F5: The Sheriff’s Office first annual Military Equipment Inventory for the surveillance

Página 162

F6: The ability to register video surveillance on a web page created specifically for

Página 162

F7: The Sheriff’s Office of Corrections’ lack of clear documentation specific to inmate

Página 162

F8: The Sheriff’s Office of Corrections’ lack of a documented process for handling

Página 162

Recomendaciones adicionales 9

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: As Ring installations become more widespread, the Sheriff’s Office should

Página 162

R2: The Sheriff’s Office should consider using its 2024 annual Military Equipment

Página 162

R3: The Sheriff’s Office Policy Manual should review and propose potential revisions

Página 163

R4: The Sheriff’s Office should inform the public on whether Mobile Device Forensic

Página 163

R5: The Sheriff’s Office may wish to recommend to the County Administration Office

Página 163

R6: Where possible, the Sheriff’s Office should publicly provide information on

Página 163

R7: The Sheriff’s Office should consider regular public reporting on the intended

Página 163

R8: The Sheriff’s Office should review its Military Equipment Inventory to ensure

Página 163

R9: The Sheriff’s Office of Corrections should consider a documented process for

Página 163