Every year a group of 19 volunteers comes together to form the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury in a civilian oversight tradition that dates back to the Magna Carta.
Wielding the power of the subpoena and carrying a mandate enshrined in the state Constitution to serve as overseers of local government, the panel spends months conducting interviews, making on-site visits and reviewing documents as a part of its investigation duty.
As the civil grand jury’s release on this year’s reports notes, the subjects covered can be selected in a variety of ways. Some investigations are the results of complaints “concerning the actions and performances of county or public officials,” while others might begin “based on community information such as newspapers.”
Among the considerations, the grand jury says, are: “Does what occurred impact or have the potential to impact many people? Is it something that is recurring or does it have the potential to recur?”
“After evaluating the information, the jury will vote to begin an investigation or not,” the release says. “If the jury votes not to investigate, the complainant is not notified.”
Of the six reports released this summer, three focus on different aspects of community disaster readiness — school plans, the preparedness of local police departments and tsunami safety. Find out more about the latter in the Journal’s Aug. 13 cover story, “The Next Wave.”
Also on tap as subjects of grand jury inquiry are water and sewer rate increase needs, the not-so-sterling view many appear to hold of the county’s Planning and Building Department, as well as an evaluation of the Eel River Conservation Camp.
Here’s a quick look at those reports and the accompanying recommendations.
Safety First: How Our Schools Prepare for Emergencies
Looking into earthquake and tsunami safety plans in place at the facilities where the community’s most precious assets spend much of the day, the grand jury found all the schools and districts reviewed meet state requirements — with some standing out as examples to be emulated.
Those receiving a special shoutout include Eureka City Schools for implementing “consistent safety procedures across all campuses,” the Fortuna Elementary School District for its “brief, user-friendly materials” presented in the form of a pamphlet and Laurel Tree Charter School in Arcata for providing “an excellent example of a clear and concise safety plan,” including “a dedicated section on parent communication during emergencies.”
As the two campuses located within the tsunami hazard zone, Peninsula Union School and Redwood Coast Montessori were also highlighted for having “effective planning and drills.” And, the grand jury notes, Peninsula Union “regularly educates parents and students about safety.”
While giving a nod to the Humboldt County Office of Education for offering “substantial support and resources to individual schools” in disaster preparation, the grand jury notes its primary recommendation is for the office to “continue what we started and identify notable safety practices and facilitate sharing this information among schools and districts,” saying not doing so previously was a “missed opportunity.”
But, the report says, school safety plans aren’t just about the information provided. Also key is how easy the information is to find on school websites, with the report noting accessibility was sometimes a problem.
“Disaster information might be in the mound of papers that schools send to parents, but the better way to provide this information to parents, staff and students is posting on the school’s website. An added benefit of having very concise disaster information on the website is that it can be easily printed as a backup in case the internet is down. The key audience should be parents; they need to know their roles and responsibilities in an emergency.”
Following that same note, parents have their own role to play in the safety gameplan by “knowing their own responsibilities and being prepared to take appropriate action when emergencies occur,” the grand jury says.
“Clear and consistent communication between schools and families is essential,” the report states. “By fostering collaboration among schools, parents, students, staff and community partners, schools can bolster their preparedness efforts and improve outcomes when disasters strike.”
Emergency Preparedness: The Role of Local Law Enforcement Agencies
In this look at emergency readiness and training, the grand jury turned its eye to police departments in the cities of Arcata, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna and Rio Dell, noting these “boots on the ground” are “among the most visible players in local disaster response.”
The main areas of inquiry included how well updates of countywide emergency plans are communicated down the line, what level of input local police agencies have into those updates and how well police departments are prepared to respond when the need arises.
There is, the report says, “room for improvement.”
Overall, however, the grand jury found local departments and those who serve in them “know what needs to be done” in the case of a disaster but inadequate staffing and funding often hampers their ability “to do it as effectively as their communities deserve,” including a lack of specialized equipment, such as drones.
“Local law enforcement agencies possess considerable knowledge and experience. They know where staging areas should be located, which routes need to be blocked, how to direct citizens to safety and who to call for assistance,” the report says.
“Unfortunately, much of the knowledge and experience is not captured in local standard operating procedures. Rather, some of it exists through the experience of long-serving officers. When these officers leave or retire, this knowledge departs with them,” it continues. “Additionally, we found that most local law enforcement agencies would benefit from more hands-on disaster-response training, particularly in coordinating with other local agencies. As a result of tight budgets and staffing challenges, there are insufficient funds for disaster response training or full-scale disaster simulations.”
On the countywide preparation front, the report found city managers or other municipal government representatives may be attending the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services’ regular meetings, but members of their respective law enforcement departments typically do not.
While largely due to time and other obligations, their absence leaves a police perspective void at the table during talks on disaster planning, the grand jury finds.
On that subject, the grand jury recommends the Humboldt County Office of Emergency Services encourage participation by “including standing law enforcement agency-relevant agenda items to gather input for the emergency plans” on agendas and for councils in the five cities to “designate representatives to attend the regular meetings and provide input.”
The panel also recommends that the county and individual cities implement a host of emergency-based training exercises for their law enforcement agencies and provide funding for those in upcoming budgets, along with allocations for “specialized disaster response equipment.”
Should Your Water and Sewer Bill Keep Going Up?
The findings on the question posed in the report’s title aren’t likely to be music to ratepayers’ ears. The long story short, according to the grand jury, is that in order to “ensure adequate water and sewer service, citizens are offered two choices: pay more now or pay a lot more later.”
“No one likes paying higher water and sewer bills, but if a community wants to have safe and reliable water and sewer services, the answer is clear,” the report states. “As water and sewer operating costs continue to rise, yes, your water and sewer bill should keep going up.”
While noting that the “decision to examine the issue of water and wastewater costs was prompted by complaints received from several Fortuna residents,” the grand jury investigation found allegations that the city failed to follow proper procedures in enacting increases in 2024 were “unfounded.”
But, the report adds, “it was evident that there was a lack of public understanding regarding how rates are determined.” Communicating the reasons why is key to “helping to address concerns and educating the public.”
The report walks through what the grand jury describes as “the complex and often confusing process of setting rates,” with a wide range of factors playing a role. Those include operational costs and regulations to population size and geography.
In assessing the situation, the panel focused on comparing and contrasting the McKinleyville Community Services District’s practices to those in the city of Fortuna, saying each has “taken a different approach with respect to funding, attempting to balance future needs with affordable rate increases.”
While finding that both “are working diligently which will ensure water and wastewater services continue to be available for users,” the grand jury notes MCSD “has adopted a more proactive stance” and “Fortuna is struggling to escape the ‘break and fix’ cycle they created.”
“Rate studies are generally conducted every five years. Fortuna conducted a five-year water rate study in 2006 with proposed rate increases adopted by the city council beginning that July,” the report states. “The rates increased annually until the end of June 2011. In 2011, the city council decided not to do a rate study. Instead, it elected to make no changes to rates, despite steadily increasing expenses for its water and wastewater system. Other than a connection fee increase in 2012, rates remained fixed until 2024.”
According to the grand jury’s conclusion, “What is clear is that ensuring adequate drinking water and a functioning sewer system require consistent yearly increases.”
Each of the recommendations center on the city of Fortuna, including that the council commission a new rate study to be presented by April of 2029, communicate with local customers that the study “will likely recommend increasing rates” and “redouble efforts to inform the public” of the impending results by “sending multiple notices, extensive use of media outlets and schedule/announce public meetings to prepare the community for the need for likely rate hikes.”
Friend or Foe? Struggling with Reputation at the Humboldt County Planning and Building Department
The “targeted investigation” into the county’s Planning and Building Department application process was in “response to community input and concerns” and, according to the grand jury, there’s some work to do.
“The experiences customers have when they interact with a governmental agency collectively becomes its reputation in the community, reflecting how well or how poorly its customers believe it performs,” the report states. “Even if an agency believes it is performing well, if it has a less-than-positive reputation, something is likely amiss. With the Humboldt County Planning and Building Department, it appeared something was amiss.”
In evaluating the reasons why, the report points to several factors: staffing issues, “at times” inadequate communication with those trying to get a project down the pike, a “perception” of unfair treatment, shortened hours and a lack of a formal complaint process.
Noting that the department “provides necessary and valuable services to the community,” the report finds that while “its budget may be inadequate, there are small, simple changes the Humboldt County Planning and Building Department can make to improve its operations and, more importantly, its community reputation.”
Those include making the department’s hours clear and informing the public appointments can be made outside of those times, reversing cuts to when the public can visit the office, having a complaint management system, conducting outreach before making changes that “significantly impact its customers” and “finding a creative way to increase pay scales for positions that are hard to recruit and retain.”
“With these improvements, customers can then better experience and appreciate all the good work done by the Planning and Building Department,” the grand jury finds.
In addition to the reports highlighted above, the grand jury also evaluated the Eel River State Conservation Camp, stating that the panel was overall “impressed with the condition, operation and function of the conservation camp during our inspections.”
“The grand jury observed that safety precautions were in place, safety equipment was up to date and inmates appeared healthy, adequately clothed, housed and fed,” the report states about the two visits. “Inmates seemed at ease, cooperative with and respectful of each other and staff, proud of the work they do and of the skills they are acquiring.”
All six reports can be found on the Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury website at humboldtgov.org/510/Civil-Grand-Jury.
Kimberly Wear (she/her) is the assistant editor at the Journal. Reach her at (707) 442-1400 ext. 105 or kim@northcoastjournal.com.
This article appears in Reports from the Grand Jury.
