Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 334-07City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: HONORABLECITY COUNCIL ~ CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office AUGUST 6, 2007 CMR: 334:07 RESPONSE TO SANTA CLARA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY’S REPORT REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED FOR DISASTERPREPAREDNESS IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached response letter to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report on Disaster Preparedness in Santa Clara County: Improvements Needed. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On May 22, 2007, the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury issued a Final Report entitled Disaster Preparedness in the County: Improvements Needed. While Palo Alto was not one of the five cities in the county reviewed as part of the Grand Jury’s investigation, recommendation six was that the cities not reviewed in the investigation examine their planning for disasters and determine whether the findings and recommendations in the report apply to them. The City must provide a formal response to the report and recommendations to the Honorable Alden E. Danner, Presiding Judge, Santa Clara County Superior Court, 191 North First Street, San Jose CA 95113. The response letter must be signed by Mayor Kishimoto (Attachment B). ATTACHMENTS: A. Grand Jury Report B. Draft Response letter to Grand Jury PREPARED BY:~r-,...-~,. k~~ Katie Whitley, Administrativ[ Assist~/g,.,,. CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: .. , EMIL~I:~RR~S~ - Assistant City Manager CMR 334:07 Page 1of I 2006-2007 SAN =A CLARA .COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT Attachment A DISASTER PREPAREDNESS IN THE COUNTY: IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED Summary Disaster events that have occurred in Santa Clara County (County) have heightened interest in emergency preparedness. The umbrella organization for emergency services in the County is the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services (Emergency Services). This organization is augmented by the emergency services organizations of each of its fifteen cities. The 2006-2007 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury (Grand Jury) interviewed the director of Emergency Services for the County and the directors of a sampling of five cities within the County. The organizations reviewed are the County, the City of San Jose, the City of Sunnyv~ale, the City of Santa Clara, the City of Morgan Hill, and the City of Gilroy. These interviews, and review of pertinent documents, focused on three areas of emergency .preparedness: personnel callback ability, equipment availability, and seismic security of communications equipment. -The personnel callback ability refers to the ability of an agency to locate, contact, and advise employees of the type of emergency and to request their return to the workplace. Equipment availability refers to the availability of types of equipment lists, such as dozers, buses or water purification systems, knowledge of where the equi.pment is located, and knowledge of how to request and obtain the equipment. Seismic security of communications equipment refers, to the presence of physical restraints to minimize damage to communications components during an earthquake. The Grand Jury found a lack of consistency in the attention given to two of the three areas of focus by the agencies reviewed. The Grand Jury made recommendations to improve emergency preparedness in these areas of focus: personnel callback, and seismic security of communications equipment. Discussion The 1.7 million residents of the County are susceptible to significant emergency events. These events could include earthquakes, weather extremes, floods, transportation accidents, toxic substance spills, terrorist attacks, and utility interruptions. The city and county governments have the responsibility to prepare for these events. They also have the responsibility to provide for various populations within the County that have limited mobility in the event of an emergency, including the sick and injured, the elderly, and those lacking transportation. Major areas of focus in this report are: (1) ability to call back personnel in the event of a major emergency, (2) equipment availability in the event of a major emergency, and (3) seismic secudty of communications equipment. The Grand .Jury reviewed the County and five of its fifteen cities to determine their preparedness in the three major areas of focus. It is the intent of this report that pertinent information, be used by the other ten cities to evaluate their own emergency preparedness. Government entities and their Emergency Operations Centers reviewed were: ¯City of Gilroy Emergency Operations Center ¯City of Morgan Hill Emergency Operations Center ¯City of San Jose Emergency Operations Center ¯City of Santa Clara Emergency Operations Center ¯City of Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety ¯Santa Clara County Emergency Operations Center Agencies whose staff members were interviewed can be found in the Interviews and Observations section of this report. Documents secured from each agency include: (1) Emergency Operations Plan, (2) personnel callback listings, (3) equipment availability lists, and (4) documents related to seismic security of communications equipment. Not all the agencies reviewed had current listings. Tours were made of all six of the emergency operations centersl The information gathered and the documents received are the bases for the Conclusions, Findings, and Recommendations below. The standards to which the seismic security of communications equipment is measured are listed in the California Building Code, Chapter 16. Section 1632 of this Chapter refers to nonstructural components supported by structures. Conclusions Ability to Call Back Personnel for Emergencies Not all government emergency operations centers surveyed have up~to-date, available information as to where their personnel live or how to contact them. Not all have a rapid means of summoning their workers in the event of an emergency. ¯ Equipment Availability All emergency ope_rations centers have listings of equipment and how to acquire additional equipment from the local area. All emergency operations centers are aware of the procedures available to acquire needed equipment through mutual aid from surrounding jurisdictions o.r through the County. Mutual aid is the response to one agency’s request for needed services or supplies by another agency, either by another agency within the County or by one from outside the County. Seismic Security of Communications Equipment None of the sampled government emergency operations centers has been evaluated for the. safety and survivability of their communications equipment during an earthquake. Few could even accurately define the applicable seismic standards to which their communications equipment installations were supposed to be measured. All ¯ of the communications equipment inspected had Some means of securing it to the floor, a wall, and/or the ceiling. However, some equipment inspected had individual components that were unsecured. General All of the government entities reviewed had an Emergency Operations Plan, an Emergency Operations Center, and a designated Emergency Operations Coordinator.or equivalent. In addition, all had thoroughly considered and clearly defined the potential emergency, needs for their jurisdictions. 3 Findings The following findings were reviewed with the subject agencies: Ability to Call Back Personnel for an Emergency F!Emergency Operations Centers of San .Jose., Santa Clara, Sunnyvale and the County have personnel availability listings that record where their personnel currently live. The City of Gilroy has recordS that are not current. ¯The City of Gilroy has contact information. The information is not current, and callback is through a manual system. They also have a text-paging system that can be used when personnel can be reached by email. ¯The.City of Morgan Hill’s records are current. Callback is a manual system. ¯The City of Santa Clara has current information, but it is a manual system relying on a phone tree system. T.he City of San Jose has printed cards with the information needed to manually call back their personnel. They maintain a list of "the line of succession" for key. staff, along with all contact information for these employees. This list is updated on a regular basis. Some departments of the City have automated systems of callback. The City of Sunnyvale has an automated system that can call a large group of employees simultaneously. The system automatically distinguishes whom to call, based on the type of incident and the size of response required. Personnel are required to update contact information regularly, which they can do on the City’s website. ¯The County has the necessary records. Their callback system is a manual system. F2 The City of Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety and some departments of the City of San Jose have automated means of summoning their workers in the event of. an emergency. However, the Emergency Operations Centers for the County and for the Cities of Gilroy, Morgan Hill, San Jose, and Santa Clara do not have automated means. Equipment Availability F3 The emergency operations centers of all the jurisdictions surveyed have listings of equipment within their control and are aware of the methods needed to obtain additional emergency equipment. 4 Seismic Security. of Communications Equipment There was no consistency among the jurisdictions surveyed as to the Codes to which their commuhications equipment was installed. In response to questions regarding seismic audits to ensure survivability, most of the jurisdictions identified some code(s) to which their equipment was installed. The Grand Jury cannot determine if the codes cited by the jurisdictions provide the equivalent level of protection for the communications equipment as specified in California Building Code Chapter 16, Section 1632. The City of Giiroy states that they comply with Section 1605.2 of Chapter 16, California Building Code. In addition, the City refers to Table 16K of the same chapter, which .provides data on Occupancy Categ0ry/Essential Facilities, and Table 16S, which deals with Near Source Factor/Seismic Source Factor. The City of San Jose states that the. City "does adhere to all State seismic retrofit requirements for buildings at the time of construction" and "newer facilities are designed and constructed to meet or exceed seismic safety standards as public safety facilities..." They did not specify the standards to which they comply. The City of Santa Clara states that they comply with Section 1632 of the California Building Code for seismic security of equipment. They further state that they use "industry standard" racks and mounting standards that secure the equipment to walls and/or ceilings. Internal audits and safety inspections of communications equipment are regularly conducted. The City of Sunnyvale states that their facilities conform to the Uniform Building Code, 1991, including the seismic requirements of Section 2312 for Earthquake Zone 4. They also state that they comply with the seismic requirements of SB 239, Chapter 1521. Contracts with their communications equipment suppliers reference the above codes, plus a lengthy list of other building codes, National Fire Protection Administration technical requirements, Occupational and Safety Administration standards, and other standards. The City of Morgan Hill states that their facility meets the California Building Code standards as an essential facility. They further state that the seismic requirements for essential facilities were incorporated in the facility during reconstruction. The County states that they know the standards and are in compliance. F5 F6 All of the emergency operations centers surveyed have an Emergency Operations Plan and a designated Emergency Operations Coordinator equivalent. or Five cities and the County were surveyed. There were ten cities within the County that were not surveyed, and the preparedness levels of these cities as related to the major areas of focus are unknown. 5 Recommendations The 2006-2007 Grand Jury recommends that the agencies take the following. actions: R1 The.Emergency Operations Center .for.the City of Gilroy needs to prepare, availability lists showing the employees’ current-residence. All emergency operations centers Should develop a procedure for keeping.their listings current. The Emergency Operations Centers for the Cities of Gilroy, Morgan Hilll San Jose, Santa Clara, and the County should consider developing automated or other rapid means of summoning their employees. R3 No recommendation. R4 R5 The County and all of the surveyed cities should assure that they meet California Building Code-Chapter 16, especially Section 1632 relating to the physical security of nonstructural equipment. No recommendation. R6 The ten cities not revie~ved in this report should examine their planning for disasters and determine if the above recommendations applyto them. 6 BIBLIOGRAPHY 2002-2003 Santa Clara C0.unty Civil Grand Jury. Inquiry into Computer Information Systems Disaster Recovery Plans. 2004-2005 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury. Confirmation of-Responses to 2002- 2003 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Recommendations. California Seismic Safety Commission. The Tsunami Threat to California. http://www.seismic.ca.,qov/pub/CSSC%2005-03%20Tsunami %20Findinqs.pdf. December 2005. California Uniform Building Code, Volume 2, Chapter 16, Structural Design Requirements, 200!. Dillon,Tim. Do we Have to Wait for Another National Emergency to Get Some of These Things Done? USA Today. September 14, 2005. Shunk, Kimberly. Golden Guardian 2006 Master Scenario of Events List (MSEL) Worksheet. November 14, 2006. Shunk, Kimberly. Email, San Jose Office of Emergency Services - Follow up to Golden Guardian 2006 Exercise. January 26, 2007. FEMA. Information Center for Natural Disasters. Hyperlinks to: Prepare for a Disaster, Determine Your Risk, Plan for Emergencies, Assemble Supplies, Protect Your Property, Are you Ready? and What FEMA Is Doing? Mitigation Activities: http://www.fema.qov/plan. November 21, 2006. Memorandum dated October 3, 2006, from Peter Kutras, Jr. to County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors, Reorganization of the Office of Emergency Services in the Office of the County Executive. US Geological Survey. Earthquake Hazards Program- Northern California. http://quake.usqs.gov/prepare/hazards.html. April 21, 2003. US Geological Survey. Earthquake Preparedness in Califomia. http://pubs.usqs..qov/.qip/2005/15. 2006. 7 Emergency Plans Ci.ty of Gilroy City of Morgan Hill City of San Jose City of Santa Clara City of Sunnyvale Santa Clara County INTERVIEWS AND OBSERVATIONS September 6, 2006 October 4, 2006 October 22, 2006 November 3, 2006 November 6, 2006 November 15, 2006 November 17, 2006 Jaaua~ 5,2007 Janua~ 5,2007 Janua~ 23,2007 Interviewed Staff, Santa Clara County Office of the Sheriff and Staff of the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services. Presentation to the 2006-2007 Grand Jury. Observed demonstration of the San Jose Police Department’s emergency equipment operational capability. Interviewed Staff of Santa Clara Fire Department. Interviewed Staff of the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services, and Staff of Telecommunications for Santa Clara County. Interviewed Staff of the Sunnyvale Department of Public Service. Observed the Golden Guardian Multi-Agency Exercise and Simulations at Moffett Field. Interviewed Staff of City of San Jose Office of Emergency Services. Interviewed Staff of Morgan Hill Police Department.. Interviewed Staff of the Gilroy Fire Department. Interviewed Staff of Emergency Services Department, Gilroy Police Department. 8 PASSED and ADOPTED by the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury on this 24th day of April 2007. Ronald R. Layman Foreperson David M. Burnham Foreperson Pro tern Kathryn C. Philp Secretary 9 Attachment B [DATE] Honorable Alden E. Danner, Presiding Judge Santa Clara County Superior Court 191 North First Street San Jose CA 95113 RE: 2006-2007 Civil Grand Jury Report Regarding Disaster Preparedness in Santa Clara County: Improvements Needed Dear Judge Dalmer: This letter is in response to the 2006-2007 Civil Grand Jury’s report on Disaster Preparedness in Santa Clara County. Pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05, the Mayor and City Council, on behalf of the City of Palo Alto, respond to the recommendations contained in the report as follows: Finding 1: The City agrees with Finding 1. Recommendation 1- Maintain current availability lists for employees: The City agrees with Recommendation 1. The City of Palo Alto has a copy of first responders’ information in our Emergency Operations Center (EOC) as well as in our 9-1-1 Emergency Dispatch Center. The City has also created an emergency contact number process for every City Department so that employees can call in to receive reporting directions in an emergency. Finding 2: The City agrees with Finding 2. Recommendation 2- Consider Developing automated or other rapid means of summoning employees: The City Agrees with Recommendation 2. The City recently completed a solicitation process for a vendor to provide automated emergency response and communications. The City Council awarded the contract for the new system on July 16, 2007, and the City will be working to implement the new Community Alerting system, including a module which will provided automated contact with employees, in the next 3-6 months. Finding 3: The City agrees with Finding 3. 070726 sm010 [NAME] July 26, 2007 Page 2 RE: (No recommendation on Finding 3: The Emergency Operations Center and 9-1-1 Emergency Dispatch Center both maintain listings of equipment and are aware of county protocols and state procedures for requesting additional equipment. 9-1-1 personnel on trained on these procedures on a frequent basis.) Finding 4: The City agrees with Finding 4 that seismic security of communications equipment is important, but cannot comment on the facilities of other agencies. Recommendation 4- Assure compliance with California Building code Chapter 16 and sections relating to physical security of nonstructural equipment: The City Agrees with recommendation 4. Although some City facilities that house communications equipment (EOC, MSC) do not meet seismic standards, the emergency communications equipment within each of these facilities is braced to seismic standards to ensure survivability in a disaster. This equipment is routinely inspected by a telecommunications engineer. The City Council also recently approved Capita! Improvement Program (CIP) project TE-05000 to remove the antenna equipment from a facility that is not up to seismic standards and construct a new tower that will be meet current codes and seismic standards and house emergency communications equipment. In addition, staff has been working with other agencies and the School District to identify alternate or back-up EOC locations so that the EOC structure itself would meet the required building and seismic standards. The City is also in the process of planning to build a new seismically-sound Public Safety building that would house a new, fully compliant EOC. Finding 5: The City agrees with Finding 5 and has an Emergency Operations Plan and a designated Emergency Operations Coordinator. (No recommendation on Finding 5: Palo Alto updated its Emergency Operations Plan in July 2007.) Finding 6: The City agrees with Finding 6. Recommendation 6- Review the Grand Jury recommendations and determine whether they apply to City of Palo Alto: The City agrees with Recommendation 6. In addition to its responses to the issues outlined above, Palo Ako is actively engaged in the planning for disasters. The City Council identified emergency preparation as one of its top five priorities for 2007. To achieve this goal, the City has updated its Emergency Operations Plan, which was recently approved by the City Council. In addition, staff annually reviews the City’s plan to make any necessary changes and has already identified certain components, including community preparedness, which will be incorporated into the plan in the next revision. The City has also committed to conducting regular training of staff who will be assigned to the EOC. In addition, the City is partnering with neighborhoods and the Palo Alto business community to help facilitate emergency planning at the neighborhood level. 070726sm010 [ NAME ] July 26, 2007 Page 3 RE: We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury report on the important issue of disaster preparedness. We look forward to continuing our commitment to emergency preparation and continuing to implement and improve the City progams related to the Grand Jury’s recommendations. Sincerely, [initials] :[initials] 070726 sm010