[San Luis Obispo] Grand jury releases report on catastrophic fire risk in Cambria

Is it ‘five minutes to midnight’ in Cambria?

–The San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury recently released a report called, “Is it Five Minutes to Midnight in Cambria? An Update on the Risk of Catastrophic Fire.” The initial purpose for this report was to determine the catastrophic fire risk in Cambria. The Cambria Community Services District (CCSD) submitted responses and updates in May and Sept. of  2017. The grand jury then submitted its Continuity Report in May, 2018, identifying responses to all reports received in 2017. This is a follow-up on activity regarding Cambria fire risks and emergency response.

The current grand jury strongly recommends that the incoming grand jury conduct a new investigation to determine if the Cambria CSD Fire Department and Cal Fire have complied with their own stated standards for ensuring appropriate fire risk mitigation.

Recommendations from the grand jury involved mitigation efforts such as amending the fire code to require the removal of dead trees from private property while exploring funding sources to help homeowners in need of financial assistance comply with that requirement.

In response, the CCSD says that recent ecological reports suggesting, and as identified in the initial grand jury report, that between 40 to 80 percent of the Monterey Pine Forest in Cambria is dead or dying, it would by financially devastating to require their removal. However, the CCSD is also quite familiar with and sensitive to the very real fire danger that exists and that the CCSD is aggressively seeking funding opportunities for dead and hazardous tree removal through available grants.

Other recommendations included developing a strategic fire plan, evacuation signs and an expansion of siren systems.

Paso Robles Daily News
by News Staff
November 18, 2021

Santa Barbara County Grand Jury calls on schools to step up to compensate for student learning loss due to pandemic

A new Santa Barbara County Grand Jury report looks at learning loss in public schools due to remote learning prompted by the pandemic.

Ideas include things like smaller class sizes.

A new Santa Barbara County Grand Jury report takes a look at some of the impacts of the pandemic on education in the region. The report makes some recommendations on what school districts can do to help compensate for setbacks some students suffered due to remote learning.

Grand Jury officials say it will take a few years to fully assess the effects on the more than 42,000 students in the county K through 8th grade public schools during the in-person shutdown.

The report is recommending steps like smaller class sizes and more one-on-one instruction. It notes money for initiatives could be an issue, because federal and state COVID relief funding won’t continue indefinitely.

It also suggests that after going through the work of making the internet available to all students, it’s important to keep those resources available.

KCLU
By Lance Orozco
November 15, 2021

[Santa Barbara County] Grand Jury counts academic, emotional cost of remote schooling

 In the spring of 2020, pandemic school shutdowns left classrooms empty in Santa Barbara County and across the country.

To slow the spread of coronavirus, teachers took classes online, and kids spent much of the 2020-2021 school year learning remotely.

Over a year and a half after the initial shutdowns, kids in grades K-8 face continuing impacts to their learning and wellbeing, a Santa Barbara County Grand Jury has found.

The Grand Jury was called to look into the issue after county residents raised concerns.

Recent Stories from ksby.com

On Monday, Nov. 15, the jury shared the results of their investigation, which focused on remote learning's impact on elementary and middle school students.

The jury noted that all districts in the county worked hard to adjust to the changing situation.

"[The districts] did a noteworthy job to make remote learning as effective as possible," Pamela Olsen, the 2021 Grand Jury Foreperson, wrote in the jury's statement.

Still, students ended the 2020-2021 school year with gaps.

The investigation found that math and English language arts skills suffered the most. Additionally, students who struggled in school before the pandemic started were the ones hardest hit by the switch to online learning.

A less quantifiable loss is the impact distance learning had on the students' social-emotional growth, the jury found. Students were left without the chance to see peers and teachers face-to-face. When teachers were not able to see students in person, problems within students' homes were hard to detect.

Long-distance alternatives, including teletherapy and Zoom counseling appointments, left students feeling uncomfortable or disconnected.

In light of the investigation's results, school districts in Santa Barbara County created plans to double down on students' emotional health.

"Schools will be using counselors, psychologists and special programs to address issues that may present themselves," the jury's statement reads.

The jury says that districts will need to keep an eye on year-to-year academic performances and recommends a standard, county-wide assessment at the end of the current school year to use as a benchmark.

They recommend smaller class sizes, one-on-one instruction and targeted testing to improve academic results.

The jury says future county budgets will need plan for the costs associated with the county-wide changes.

The Santa Barbara County Grand Jury is made up of a volunteer citizens spread across the county's five supervisorial districts.

KSBY
By Bethany Reeves
November 15, 2021

Only One VTA [Santa Clara County] Board Member Uses Public Transit

The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority is dealing with tight budgets, low ridership and out-of-touch officials.

A San José Spotlight survey found that just one of the 18 lawmakers who oversee and govern the troubled transit agency—of those who responded—actually ride its buses and trains.

San José Spotlight contacted all 18 VTA board members to ask if they ride public transit. Only six responded—Morgan Hill Mayor Rich Constantine, Palo Alto Vice Mayor Patrick Burt, San Jose Councilmember Raul Peralez, Mountain View Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga, San Jose Vice Mayor Chappie Jones and county Supervisor Joe Simitian. Peralez was the only one who confirmed he has regularly used VTA transportation in the past—though he said he's not used public transit in about a month.

With decreasing ridership caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, fear of gun violence and growing frustration with VTA's public transportation, funding is a problem for the transit agency.

However, three Civil Grand Jury reports concerning VTA found its governing structure is the root of the problem. The VTA Board of Directors is a rotating group of 18 elected officials across all cities in Santa Clara County. Under the existing structure, there is no guarantee that board members have any special expertise in transit, infrastructure or project management. A proposed bill by Assemblyman Marc Berman to restructure the board's selection has been shelved at his request since May, according to California Legislation Information.

Who rides VTA?

Despite its function as the vital public transportation system of the South Bay, many elected officials who serve on the board do not use the VTA frequently—or even at all. Those who do point to flaws in current operations.

Constantine said he hasn't needed public transportation at all since the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic because government meetings have gone virtual.

Jones confirmed he does not use VTA on a regular basis. Likewise, Burt does not use VTA regularly, citing that North County is "better served" by Caltrain.

Transit activists have pointed out that many board members do not use the very service they represent.

"I would like to see (the VTA board) use public transportation one time a month or one time a week," said Monica Mallon, founder of Turnout4Transit and San José Spotlight columnist. But right now, Mallon said, it's impractical for officials to use VTA. Despite this, she believes the board is "understanding" of issues regular riders face.

Eugene Bradley, founder of Silicon Valley Transit Users, told San José Spotlight it's a "huge issue" that many board members don't use VTA on a regular basis.

"There is little empathy for those who ride VTA when those who manage it (don't) ride themselves," he said.

VTA felt the impact of COVID-19 deeply, but ridership has been decreasing for years before the pandemic. Public records show that from 2015 to 2016, total boardings decreased by 140,889. From 2016 to 2017, the decrease was an additional 121,262.

"There aren't enough options to get (people) out of their cars," Constantine complained about VTA's flaws. Commuters in the South Bay are turned off by slow and unmanageable transportation options, he added.

Peralez is the exception and rides VTA. Still, the trains are so slow, the downtown councilmember said, that he could beat the light rail on his bicycle.

"I've been a user of the (public transit) system since I was like four," Peralez said.

Some riders avoided VTA services after a mass shooting in May left nine people dead before the gunman committed suicide. Light rail trains also shuttered for almost three months following the tragedy as employees recovered from trauma and the agency scrambled to fill positions, taking another bite out of the agency's recovery.

While there are ongoing issues with the public transportation system, VTA board members are discussing ways to improve the service.

"There are a number of technologies that show great promise," Burt said.

This includes a potential new light rail system that could work both on tracks and on roads, which exists in other cities in the world, according to Peralez.

"That conversation about (new technology) has been ongoing," he said.

Peralez said the biggest challenge facing VTA is securing more funding.

"Getting enough revenue—there's not one thing the VTA can do to solve the problems it currently has," said Peralez. "It's easier said than done."

San Jose Spotlight
Marie Louise Leon
Wednesday, Nov 10, 2021

[Sacramento] Grand jury: Unsafe drinking water, lack of transparency in an Arden-Arcade water district

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KTXL) — An almost one-square-mile water district in Arden-Arcade is at the center of a scathing grand jury report, alleging a “literal flood of concerns.”

The Del Paso Manor Water District stretches down Watt Avenue from Marconi Avenue to near Cottage Way, with El Camino cutting through to the district’s end at Eastern Avenue. It serves residents and businesses such as AT&T, Emigh Hardware and WinCo.

The water district’s “relatively small size” is what a Sacramento grand jury believes may have enabled the board to put off acting on critical issues involving health, safety and financial matters.

The grand jury investigated the district for seven months after a formal complaint was made in January alleging “flagrant misconduct” by the board of directors.

The grand jury, at the end of its investigation, said the board has been “reckless and irresponsible in its administration of the District’s responsibilities to residents and ratepayers.”

“The District’s elected officials have repeatedly failed to hold themselves accountable and have abdicated their primary mission to ‘provide safe drinking water in accordance with California and federal regulations and to maintain a reliable water supply for water consumption and fire protection,’” the report said.

The board also did not act transparently, which did not allow the public to be informed of important issues regarding their water, the report said.

According to the grand jury, the district has aging infrastructure and failed to complete repairs and upgrades that would have cost about $35 million. That could potentially cause the “potential failure of the entire water complex,” ​the grand jury wrote.

Residents and businesses in the district are served by just two wells, and the water is transported through pipelines that are more than 60 years old. The district’s master plan, which documents planning strategies developed to address aging infrastructure and changing water supply pressures, is old as well, officials said.

 “This District is operating under a Water Master Plan and a Municipal Service Review which are more than a decade old,” explains Grand Jury Foreperson Deanna Hanson. “The idea that officials are doing business ‘behind the floodgates’, so to speak, does a disservice to the public and its right to understand the impact of vital safety issues, as well as the looming financial impacts.”

The grand jury also reported that the district did not timely notify customers that a water well had been contaminated with PCE, which can cause dizziness and long-term adverse effects to the liver and kidneys.

As for management at the DPMWD, officials described the district as being in “disarray.” The district had four general managers resign in the span of two years. Most of the board of directors also left their positions in September of 2021.

The grand jury made several recommendations, including ones addressing the need for transparency by the district.

Fox40 News
Jose Fabian
November 8, 2021

School leaders respond to San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury’s equity report

In response to a San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury report which outlines a lack of diversity in school faculty that matches student demographics, school districts across the county have begun offering responses with the bodies largely agreeing with the findings and promising to improve hiring practices.

“It’s a really important issue in our county and our community and really digs into what that looks like here specifically,” San Mateo-Foster City School District Trustee Noelia Corzo said during an Oct. 7 meeting.

The civil grand jury, an independent investigative body made of up 19 county residents, surveyed 19 of the county’s 23 school districts on each jurisdiction’s hiring practices, knowledge of the San Mateo County Office of Education’s workforce diversity goal and challenges and strategies for hiring diverse teachers. Officials of three other school districts were interviewed.

Through their study, “Building a Racially and Ethically Diverse Teaching Workforce: A Challenge for Our Schools,” they found that that while about 72% of public school students enrolled in the 2018-19 school year came from non-white families, only 25.8% of credentialed teachers had similar ethnic groups, according to date provided by the county Office of Education.

Of the 6,082 teachers employed across the county in the 2018-2019 school year, more than 69% of them identified as white. The next largest demographic were Latino and Hispanic teachers who accounted for 10.14% of the total number, followed by Asian teachers with 8.45%.

Comparatively, white students only made up about 25% of the student body that same year, surpassed by Latino and Hispanic students who accounted for nearly 38% and followed by Asian students with 15.7%.

In response to the major divide, the grand jury made three recommendations. The body called for districts to include a commitment to teacher diversity within their strategic plans or objectives in alignment with the SMCOE’s plan as a guide and to make the document publicly accessible.

The report also recommended that the SMCOE routinely sponsor teacher diversity forums for top district officials to touch on recruitment challenges faced by the industry. Regionally, districts have struggled to recruit staff during a shortage the grand jury said has been exacerbated by a high cost of living, tough housing market and strained teacher pipeline.

“Recruiting teachers, specifically teachers of color, who reflect the diversity of students enrolled, is a formidable task according to interviews with school district representatives. School districts across California and the nation experience these same challenges,” read the report which also asked that SMCOE share demographic data with school districts once it’s gathered.

Districts are legally required to respond to the report in a letter in which they note the points they agree or disagree with. While some districts have yet to respond, others have drafted and approved their letters with little discussion.

Before approving the letters though, some school board members took issue with the grand jury’s criticism of an online Equity Network program hosted by the San Mateo County Board of Education in 2020. Given that the 20-hour program was held online due to the pandemic, the grand jury asserted it was limited in its ability to facilitate “thoughtful, equity-driven decisions.”

But Ken Chin, president of the San Mateo-Foster City School District Board of Trustees, said he found the program very helpful. Carrie Du Bois, vice president of the Sequoia Union High School District Board of Trustees, shared disappointment that the group would single out the program, noting the Board of Education is only one of many advocacy arms conducting equity work.

“I’m surprised the grand jury would point that out. I do feel that the work is ongoing,” Du Bois said during an Oct. 13 meeting. “I don’t believe that the pandemic disrupted that work.”

Still, the letters were approved and largely mirror each other in agreeing that districts could do better, declining to agree or disagree in areas where studies are referenced, noting what work has already been done in each respective district and acknowledging more must be done.

Such comments were made by John Baker, a member of the South San Francisco Unified School District board, during an Oct. 8 meeting in which he noted that while the language in the letter is “boiler plate” the district still recognizes there’s room for much improvement.

“While this is not clearly defined, what the grand jury is saying, we do need to do better,” Baker said. “And we do recognize that and the way that it’s stated in the response may not necessarily reflect that but I do want to let the public who follows us know that we are aware of the issue.”

Sue Wieser, San Mateo-Foster City School District assistant superintendent for Human Resource, said that the district is committed to implementing the recommendations in the report by June 30, the deadline set by the grand jury.

“What we’re hoping is that we’ll be able to continue work in the district around increasing workforce diversity and that perhaps it will be incorporated into the strategic plan,” Wieser said.

Much of the work the district’s Equity Taskforce has conducted has overlapped with the grand jury’s recommendations, noted Trustee Shara Watkins.

Corzo shared appreciation for the grand jury’s work. She also noted that while the district has already begun some of the work called for in the report, she would like to see the board and district administrators continue to investigate the matter.

“There’s a lot here but I also think that our district has been making moves on a lot of these issues internally already,” Corzo said. “So while we have to respond legally to this grand jury finding and we have, I hope that we continue to dig into these issues.”

The Daily Journal
Sierra Lopez
November 1, 2021

[Los Angeles County] Food waste recommendations taken with grain of salt

‘Not warranted, not reasonable,’ Hidden Hills says

They may be accused of falling behind schedule, but when it comes to getting rid of food waste, Hidden Hills officials have a message regarding recommendations from the 2019-20 Los Angeles County civil grand jury: They’re a waste.

The 23-member grand jury investigated the issue of discarded food, which California is trying to steer away from landfills over public health concerns.

The grand jury investigation was spurred by Senate Bill 1383, a law signed by former Gov. Jerry Brown in 2016 that kick-started a statewide effort to reduce pollutant emissions by diverting organic waste from landfills.

Local communities, including Hidden Hills, haul their waste to the Calabasas Landfill.

SB 1383’s goal is to achieve a statewide reduction in the emission of so-called short-lived climate pollutant gases like methane, black carbon, and hydrofluorocarbon by up to half of 2013 levels in the year 2030.

SB 1383 hopes to achieve the goal by requiring 75% recycling of all organic waste—which creates methane gas when it decomposes— by 2025.

Foodservice providers, distributors, and entities in any industry where organic waste is present who don’t meet the standards that take effect in stages through 2024 are subject to fines.

Last year, the grand jury released a report titled “A Diet for Landfills: Cutting Down on Food Waste,” which details how food waste creates methane emissions in landfills and notes that only 4% of current organic waste recycling infrastructure can accept food waste.

Keep out of the trash bin

A guiding principle behind the report is that food doesn’t belong in the garbage. Nearly 2 million tons of food waste goes to landfills each year in Los Angeles County; the per-day tonnage is 4,000 to 6,000.

The state wants to see organic waste properly separated—both from the rest of the garbage and by whether it’s green or food waste—so it can be processed through composting or anaerobic digestion, that is, using fermentation to break down organic matter from animals, plants or sewage to produce biogas.

This, says the grand jury, is proving difficult in L.A. County.

“We discovered a labyrinth of ways that food waste continues to end up in landfills,” the report states. Against this backdrop, the grand jury made 14 recommendations and asked all 88 cities and unincorporated areas in the state for responses. Hidden Hills officials were required to respond to four of the recommendations, but they’ve been lax.

In an Oct. 22 report to the City Council, Roxanne Diaz, Hidden Hills city attorney, said the original response, which was supposed to be sent to the grand jury last summer, “was never processed.”

Only recently did it go to the council and mayor for review.

The gist, according to the letter of response that bears Mayor Stuart Siegel’s signature, is simple: Hidden Hills is a town of some 560 households and a real estate office, and the prevention of food waste is already a priority.

The four recommendations and the Hidden Hills responses are as follows:

Establish a weekly food waste drop-off center.

“This recommendation will not be implemented,” the city says, “because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. . . . Implementation would likely result in minimal diversion and would be an expense and burden on a staff of four persons. . . . Residents are provided a green waste bin and can place food waste in that container. The city’s waste hauler processes the bin for compost.”

Create an incentive program for residents and businesses to separate food waste. This could be in the form of a gift card to a local grocery store/farmers market or a discount on a solid-waste fee.

Once again, the city trashes the idea as neither warranted nor reasonable.

“The city is comprised of residential homes and no businesses (except for a small real estate office). Creating an incentive program is not warranted for a city of our size in addition to the fact that the city has no businesses in its jurisdiction.”

County officials should modify contracts with food vendor companies that are inside county facilities to include food waste separation and recycling.

The Hidden Hills response?

“The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted since it pertains to county facilities.”

Elected officials in the county and cities should adopt the 11 suggestions in the March 2018 Countywide Organics Waste Management Plan and express support for the need to increase capacity and site, and build new facilities to handle organic waste.

While officials in Hidden Hills agree with the intent of this last recommendation, they will adopt only “what is required to be adopted” by state law.

Besides, the letter notes, Hidden Hills already has a solid-waste ordinance with self-haul provisions. The ordinance requires an accurate reporting of hauled waste to make sure diversion requirements are met. City officials did not respond to requests for comment.

The city’s franchise hauler, Waste Management, processes all residential organic waste generated in the city and is required to submit monthly activity reports to ensure compliance with state regulations.

Starting next year, households and businesses will be required to keep their food waste out of their trash bin. Customers will use their green cart for both green waste and food waste, which Waste Management is contracted to pick up and process for compost.

The Acorn
By Scott Steepleton
November 04, 2021

 

Some information about the [Calaveras County] Grand Jury

 Comments

Every year each county in California selects a set of jurors to serve on the Civil Grand Jury which then investigates the operations of county government. The Civil Grand Jury selects which officers, departments, and local agencies it will investigate based on prior grand jury recommendations, current juror recommendations, and citizen complaints.

As Calaveras County begins its Civil Grand Jury process for 2022, we have an opportunity to let the jury know which officers, departments, and local agencies we want them to investigate. This is an important opportunity for local citizens. Send in a Letter of Concern outlining what you believe needs to be investigated and provide as much supporting evidence as possible.

Submit your citizen complaint online at grandjury.calaverasgov.us , or via email to ccgrandjuryfore@gmail.com , or via U.S. mail to P.O. Box 1414, San Andreas, CA 95249. Your complaint will be kept confidential. It is important to remember this is a CIVIL Grand Jury examining COUNTY officers, departments, and agencies.

You can also review all previous grand jury reports online to see the results of past investigations. In 2019-2020, the Grand Jury produced seven reports which, in part, discovered property taxes being collected to build a college in Valley Springs that has never materialized and that animal control facilities and operations are severely inadequate and unsafe.

In 2016, an investigation into the sheriff’s department system for filing complaints against the department revealed a lack of consistency by the department in investigating the complaints filed, which meant complaints were not always addressed. Grand jury investigations can also reveal that a department is operating well, such as the county recycling program, which was found to be meeting its goals in 2016.

The Community Action Project and the Calaveras Planning Coalition urge you to stay involved in local issues. Learn more at calaverascap.com.

Megan Fiske, Outreach Coordinator
Community Action Project/Calaveras Planning Coalition

Calaveras Enterprise
October 20, 2021

Sutter supervisors respond to [Sutter County] grand jury on fire department, Gray Avenue property

 Oct. 1—The Sutter County Board of Supervisors filed responses last week to the findings of the 2020/21 Grand Jury related to Sutter County Fire and Emergency Services and the Gray Avenue property.

The Grand Jury made five recommendations regarding the Sutter County Fire and Emergency Services. The grand jury recommended the board direct staff to identify a sufficient permanent funding source of funding for each fire jurisdiction in the county that maintains pace with rising population, increased number of structures, equipment costs, optimal manning, salaries comparable to neighboring counties, and workers' compensation insurance costs before the end of fiscal year 2022/23.

Supervisors said the recommendation had not been implemented yet but will be by the 2022/23 timeframe. Staff estimate funding sources will be identified by June 2022. The county has established a Fire Services Ad Hoc Committee to address the financial situation within the fire department and research possible solutions including an increase to the existing special fire tax, a new property-based tax assessment to cover all areas covered by Sutter County Fire and a possible sales tax measure. Sutter Fire received a FEMA SAFER grant for additional staff and will reapply in 2022.

The second recommendation was for the board to immediately find or create alternate revenue streams such as recouping costs from motor vehicle accidents involving commercial and reckless or impaired drivers. In their response, supervisors said the recommendation will be implemented by Dec. 1. Sutter County Fire presented an ordinance to the board to address cost recovery from motor vehicle accidents. The ordinance will not have a direct financial impact on the public as the fees are already paid by auto insurance policies of those involved in at-fault accidents.

The grand jury recommended that the board start a planned campaign to educate the public on the need to increase the amount and scope of the special fire tax to include the reset of the county and to include a cost-of-living adjustment for the next open election cycle. The board said this recommendation will be implemented by April 2022. Once it is confirmed what action will be taken to secure needed funds, county staff will schedule town hall meetings to discuss the financial situation of the department.

Fourth, the grand jury recommended that the county administrative officer (CAO) develop and institute a viable capital improvement plan for firefighting equipment in Sutter County before the end of fiscal year 2022/23. Supervisors said this has already commenced with the adoption of the recent 2021/22 budget and will be completed by the end fiscal year 2022/23. Funding issues for the fire department need to be resolved before any capital improvement plan can be viable, according to the board's responses.

Finally, jurors recommended the board of supervisors direct staff to work with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for consolidating all county service areas (CSAs) and fire protection districts into one that is run by one paid fire chief by the end of fiscal year 2022/23. The board said this has not been implemented but a related municipal services review process of CSAs F,C and D has begun. The review is being done to prepare for the Sutter Pointe Phase One Response Plan.

Gray Avenue property

The grand jury provided four recommendations about the former Kmart location at 850 Gray Ave., Yuba City, that has been vacant for the last seven years. The county plan is to consolidate and house the Health and Human Services Department personnel and equipment onto this property.

It was recommended that the board of supervisors oversee the CAO to create a policy that provides guidance and procedures for efficient leasing, purchasing, management and disposal of property to be completed in 120 days.

"This recommendation will not be implemented," supervisors said in response. "It may be beneficial to adopt a policy regarding leasing, but subjecting transactions to a 120-day limitation may not be realistic as every transaction is different."

The second recommendation from the grand jury was completed as the purchase of the building is complete. Third, jurors recommended the CAO work through the Department of Development Services to complete the renovation of the facility and relocation of HHS by the summer of 2025. The supervisors said this will not be implemented. The response said the cost of building materials and labor has made construction under the current plan cost prohibitive. County staff is working to revise the design and layout of space to incorporate post-pandemic work environments.

"The timeline suggested by the grand jury may not be feasible given current construction conditions," the supervisors' response read.

Finally, the grand jury recommended supervisors request the CAO provide semi-annual reports on financing, expenditures, renovation and relocation progress beginning six months after the close of escrow. The board of supervisors said the recommendation will be implemented and that bi-annual reports will be provided to supervisors beginning this December.

To access the full grand jury report and responses, visit suttercourts.com.

Appeal-Democrat
David Wilson
October 1, 2021

[Orange County] The saga continues: Irvine reconsidering plan for controversial Great Park

Blog note: This story refers to several grand jury reports on this project (scroll down)

In the beginning, the Great Park in Irvine was envisioned as the second-coming of New York’s iconic Central Park.

Bogged down for years with accusations of cronyism and improper management, the park hasn’t lived up to its original billing. Now, the city of Irvine is considering an update of its master plan of the park.

Located at the site of the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, the park today has a large sports complex, a soccer stadium, an amphitheater, a skating rink and a large orange balloon.

“Really, when we think about the Great Park, it’s a big sports facility, which is great,” Irvine Vice Mayor Tammy Kim said Tuesday during a City Council meeting. “I know that there’s residents here and I know myself, really want to see the ‘park,’ in Great Park.”

City staff will spend the next two months seeking the public’s input on future plans for the park.

Joel Belding, deputy director of planning and development, said during a presentation to the council that staff intend to consider residents’ comments and then devise a roadmap on how to move forward with the planning of the park in January, with a presentation to the council for consideration.

Outreach is expected to include in-person meetings at the Great Park, virtual meetings, meetings with homeowners’ associations, recorded videos and interactive online tools for people to contribute to the design process of the park.

Staff will also look for public opinion on two major projects in the park, a long-awaited botanical garden and the future of the FivePoint Amphitheatre, which is currently considered temporary. The city posted on Twitter earlier this week that there have been a spike in noise complaints tied to two concerts at the amphitheater. The city said it’s working to rectify the issue with the help of Live Nation, the operator of the venue.

During the meeting, the council began moving forward on a few projects in the Great Park, including the botanical garden.

“But I believe this council, all of us here, we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to create something beautiful and awe-inspiring that can be appreciated now and for future generations,” Kim said. “I want to use that opportunity to build a world-class garden where people from all over the world and all over this country will want to visit.”

Following comments from community members in favor of the garden, the council provided direction for city staff to find a location for the project.

“I hope that today’s meeting leads to a final site designation and path to construction of the long-promised and much-desired, world-class botanical garden,” said Teena Spindler, president of the nonprofit Great Park Garden Coalition. “As you know, the garden has been in the plan since the very beginning in the original master plan, and has been confirmed through public outreach surveys over the years.”

Mayor Farrah Khan suggested that the garden could go in the park’s planned Cultural Terrace, a 236-acre portion of the park. On Tuesday, the council approved a contract with the IBI Group, an architectural service company, to help with the development of the terrace.

Also at the meeting, the council considered whether UCI Health could be a sponsor of the Great Park. Under the proposal, the organization would pay the city about $5.7 million for a 10-year agreement. Ultimately, the council decided to reconsider the item at a later meeting after several members expressed concerns about the proposed sponsorship.

Councilman Anthony Kuo was concerned that the exclusivity part of the sponsorship would inhibit the city from entering into agreements with other healthcare groups. Kim agreed with Kuo and suggested that the deal didn’t bring in enough money for the city, considering it’s in a big media market.

“We look at this and we think, ‘Oh, it’s a lot of money,’ but it actually isn’t compared to what they’re getting,” Kim said.

The public voted to turn the military base into the then-named Orange County Great Park in 2002. The city had big plans for the park, but they never came to fruition.

In 2013, Irvine hired Hagen, Streiff, Newton & Oshiro (HSNO) to conduct an investigation into why more than $250 million was spent to develop 88 acres of the 1,300-acre Great Park.

For years, the Great Park was mired in controversy, with residents claiming it hadn’t remotely met expectations as the so-called Central Park of the West.

Three grand jury reports were produced regarding the park in 2006, 2010 and 2015. The first investigation criticized city officials for a lack of transparency, while the second questioned the financial structure of the project. The third concluded that “from the outset, the project was poorly managed and did not follow conventional principles,” and “there seemingly was no effective oversight over invoices, contract compliance or quality control.”

HSNO conducted an initial audit for $240,000, then withdrew it in 2015 and replaced it with a second audit. Costs climbed to $1.7 million. HSNO’s final report concluded that the project was embroiled in financial mismanagement, leading to the waste of tens of millions of dollars between 2005 and 2012. Findings included that former Mayor Larry Agran, then chairman of the Great Park Corp., misled the public, beginning in 2006 with an understatement of the cost of the park. Agran currently sits on the City Council.

The saga continued in 2020, when HSNO surrendered its accounting license after a legal battle with a state oversight agency that claimed the firm “failed to comply with professional standards, engaged in numerous acts of negligence, and disseminated false and misleading information.”

Most recently, homeowners in the Great Park neighborhoods have expressed disapproval of special-assessment taxes they have to pay toward the development of the Great Park. In July, the City Council decided to drop “Orange County” from the original name of the park.

Los Angeles Times
BY BEN BRAZILSTAFF WRITER
SEPTEMBER 29, 2021