Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08062002 - C118 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra .� FROM: JOHN SWEETEN, County Administrator Costa DATE: AUGUST 6, 2002 County SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 0212 ENTITLED "KICK THE C.A.N. (COMMUNITY ALERT NETWORK)" SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT report as the Board of Supervisors' response to Grand Jury Report No. 0212 entitled, "Kick the C.A.N. (Community Alert Network),'. BACKGROUND: The 2001-2002 Grand Jury filed the above-referenced report on June 14, 2002, which was reviewed by the Board of Supervisors and subsequently referred to the County Administrator and Health Services Department, who prepared the attached response that clearly specifies: A. Whether the finding or recommendation is accepted or will be implemented; B. If a recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and a definite target date; C. A delineation of the constraints if a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within a six-month period; and D. The reason for not accepting or adopting a finding or recommendation. n � z CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: `4ECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOANDATION OF BOARS COMMITTEE —APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S). ' .Y -------------------------------------_.,----_-------_--------------------- ACTION OF BO FAD ON a,✓� OVE AS RECOMMENDED OTHER F S/ VOTE OF SUPERVISORS '3> I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE s� , AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ` s' .� ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE AYES: NOES: SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: V; ATTESTED CONTACT: JULIE ENEA(925)335-1077 JOHN SWtETEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CC: PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE GRAND JURY COUNTY ADM INtSTRATOR HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM DIRECTOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION �X' BY _' '"" ' 4 DEPUTY August 6, 2002 Kick the C.A.N. County Response to Grand Jury Report No. 0212 Page 1 RESPONSE TO GRAND .JURY REPORT NO. 0212 KICK THE C.A.N. (COMMUNITY ALERT NETWORK) FINDINGS I 1. During the period from September 9, 2000 to February 22, 2002, there were thirteen incidents reported to the Hazardous Materials Program. Response: Partially disagree. The term "incident"has a specific meaning for the Hazardous Materials Program: "a response to the field by staff to investigate a release or spill of hazardous materials that may pose a threat to the community or the environment" As used in the Grand Jury's report, the term is limited to the activation of the Community Warning System's Community Alert Network's Emergency Telephone Ring Down System for a stated period of time. 2. The C.A.N. system was activated eleven times during the same time period. Two incidents did not require the activation of the C.A.N. system. Response: Agree. 3. During the eleven activations of the C.A.N. system, a total of 99,888 calls were requested to be made to county residents in the affected areas Response: Agree. 4. Of the 99,888 requested calls, 64,578 were actually attempted. This represents 64.7% of the total requested. Response: Agree. 5. Of the 99,888 requested calls, only 50,762 were actually connected to a phone number. This represents 50.8% of the total requested. Response: Agree. 6. Of the 99,888 requested calls, 25,883 were not delivered due to busy signals, no answer, no ring, or operator interrupt. The 24,879 delivered calls to warn of the alert status represents only 24.9% of the total county residents requested to be called. Response: Partially disagree. While the Board agrees with the calculation, there were circumstances during certain events that caused the emergency call process to stop, at staffs direction, before the requested call list was completed. This occurred because emergency conditions were abated and no additional emergency calls were required. In these instances, if the "total"calls were substituted for the "requested"calls in the calculation, which would more accurately determine the number of successful calls, then the total number of calls received by the targeted population during the emergency is closer to 701. 7. Of the 24.9% of the calls that were connected, some of the calls were received after an all clear was declared. Response: Agree. Kick the G.A.N. August 6, 2002 County Response to Grand Jury Report No. 0212 Page 2 CONCLUSION The C.A.N. system, as is now operating, is not effective. At best, the system is reaching only 24.9% of the intended county residents. Response: Disagree. While the system doesn't reach all of the intended residents, post-incident surveys show that most of the residents who teamed about an incident learned of it from calls they received from the emergency telephone ring down system. The survey data indicates that the system, even with its failures, is one of the most effective tools available to the County to alert the community to an emergency situation. RECOMMENDATION The 2001-2002 Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends that: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors direct the appropriate county department to research, select, and implement a more effective system of informing the county population of the occurrence of an emergency alert. Response: Has been implemented. On December 4, 2001, the Board of Supervisors directed the Health Services Department to solicit Requests for Information (RFIs) from vendors that meet the County's expectations for an Emergency Telephone Ring Down System. In response, the Health Services Department developed an RFI and, in April 2002, sent it to a list of eight vendors with a response deadline of May 31, 2002. Five vendors responded to the RFI. A five-member review panel was convened representing the community, industry, a city council, the County Office of Emergency Services, and the County Health Services Department. The panel reviewed the RFIs and ranked three of the vendors highly. The Internal Operations Committee requested the Health Services Department to invite the top three ranked vendors to make a presentation to the panel in August, and to return to the Committee with its final ranking in September for further direction. COMMENTS The emergency telephone ring down system was never envisioned by the County to be a panacea for providing community warnings, but one tool in a larger toolbox that also includes sirens, media coverage, and local emergency response. When the Board of Supervisors ventured into the area of an emergency telephone ring down systems, it was an emerging technology, which is evidenced by the fact that only one vendor at the time, the Community Alert Network, could provide a system that met the County's requirements. In recognition of the newness of the technology, the Board ordered that the contract be reviewed in three years, prompting the Board's recent action to issue an RFl to new vendors.