Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Item 13 - OC Grand Jury's Investigative Report, Findings, and Recommendations Regarding Group Homes and the Orange County Animal Care Shelter
Planning and Building Agency santa-ana.org/departments/planning-and-building/ Item # 13 City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Staff Report August 15, 2023 TOPIC: Receive and File - Orange County Grand Jury's Investigative Report, Findings, and Recommendations Regarding Group Homes and the Orange County Animal Care Shelter AGENDA TITLE Receive and File the Orange County Grand Jury's Investigative Report, Findings, and Recommendations Regarding Group Homes and the Orange County Animal Care Shelter and Authorize the City Manager to Deliver the City's Response to the Findings and Recommendations to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court RECOMMENDED ACTION Receive and File the Orange County Grand Jury's Investigative Report, Findings, and Recommendations Regarding Group Homes and the Orange County Animal Care Shelter and Authorize the City Manager to Deliver the City's Response to the Findings and Recommendations to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. DISCUSSION Respectively on June 2nd and June 7th of 2023, the Orange County Grand Jury (OCGJ) issued two investigative documents. These documents contained findings and recommendations based on their investigations and further compel responses from the City of Santa Ana and other (city and county) jurisdictions regarding the identified issues and suggestions. The first report, titled "The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange: Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice, " issued by the OCGJ on June 2nd, appears to have been partially prompted by recent direct complaints to the OC Grand Jury. These complaints were related to operational concerns of Orange County Animal Care (OCAC), which had been discussed in five previous Grand Jury reports. The main goal of the June 2nd OCGJ report was to present an overview of the current operations, internal mechanisms, culture, and challenges faced by OCAC. The Grand Jury's investigation was based on interviews, public and shelter documents, surveys, site visits, news sources, and accounts related to the shelter's activities. As a notable outcome, this Grand Jury report highlights unresolved deficiencies in the shelter's operations. The complete report is provided as Exhibit 2. Receive and File - Orange County Grand Jury's Investigative Report, Findings, and Recommendations Regarding Group Homes and the Orange County Animal Care Shelter August 15, 2023 Page 2 The subsequent OCGJ report, published on June 7th and titled "Welcome to the Neighborhood: Evaluating the Management of Group Homes' Integration by Cities," delved into the issue of Group Homes and their effects on cities and their communities. The Grand Jury examined how Orange County cities managed the inflow and placement of group homes, with the aim of identifying effective local governance strategies for this industry. The underlying premise was that individual cities bear the responsibility of integrating group homes, which should ensure the well-being of group home residents while minimizing any negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods. This OCGJ report particularly recognized the State of California's role in challenging and restricting local jurisdictions' authority to effectively address group homes through zoning regulations. The full report is attached as Exhibit 1. In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the OCGJ mandates that the City must respond to the conclusions and recommendations outlined in both reports. An overview of the OCGJ's findings, recommendations, and the City's corresponding responses, are attached as Exhibits 3 and 4. Once authorized by the City Council, the responses documented in Exhibits 3 and 4 will be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There is no environmental impact associated with this action. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. EXHIBIT(S) 1. County of Orange Grand Jury Investigative Report, Findings and Recommendations Regarding Group Homes ("Welcome to the Neighborhood" Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?) 2. County of Orange Grand Jury Investigative Report, Findings and Recommendations Regarding the Orange County Animal Care shelter (Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice, "The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange) 3. City Response to County of Orange Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Regarding Group Homes 4. City Response to County of Orange Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Regarding the Orange County Animal Care shelter Submitted By: Minh Thai, Executive Director of Planning and Building Approved By: Kristine Ridge, City Manager ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST • SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 • 714/834-3320 June 7, 2023 www.ocgrandjuryorg • FAX 714/834-5555 Mayor Valerie Amezcua City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza CONFIDEPITIAL Santa Ana Blvd., CA 92702 Dear Mayor Amezcua: Enclosed is a copy of the 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury report, "Welcome to the Neighborhood" Are cities responsibly managing the integration ofgroup homes? Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05(f), a copy of the report is being provided to you at least two working days prior to its public release. Please note that under that subsection, "No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report." (Emphasis added.) It is required that you provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations of this report directed to your office in compliance with Penal Code 933.05(a) and (b), copy is enclosed. Please distribute this report to your governing body. For each Grand Jury recommendation accepted and not implemented, provide a schedule for future implementation. In addition, by the end of March of each subsequent year, please report on the progress being made on each recommendation accepted but not completed. These annual reports shoald continue until all recommendations are implemented. Please mail'the response to the recommendations to Maria Hernandez, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701, with a separate copy mailed to the Orange County Grand Jury, 700 Civic Center .Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92761, no later than 90 days after the public release date, June 12, 2023, in compliance with Penal Code 933, copy enclosed. The due date then is September 13, 2023. Should additional time for responding to this report be -necessary for further analysis, Penal Code 933.05(b)(3) permits an extension of time up to six months from the public release date. Such extensions should be advised in writing, with the information required in Penal Code 933.05(b)(3), to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with a separate copy of the request to the Grand Jury. We tentatively _plan to _issue the public release on June_ 13-, 2023. The report will be available on the Grand Jury website at www.ocgrandjury.org upon public release. arson RUNTY GRAND JURY JVS:jm Enclosures: Grand Jury Report Penal Code 933, 933.05 Cc: Christine Ridge, City Manager y �Y hi r �{� tt I ��eY � ''��. F� �r `7 � �,IL'� '�•FF9 "t', as sit ' T� Te .i f L IF Welcome to the Neighborhood Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes? �.t or 0� U0 Ri ,)l ` o9t.IFo?. County of Orange Grand Jury 2022-2023 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................... 4 REASONFOR STUDY............................:.........................................................................................6 - - - - - METHOD OF-STUDY.......................................................................................................................7 - - -- -- ---- LNVESTIGATION -AND .ANALYSIS..................................................................................................... 7 _OC Group_Home Density..............................................................................................................8 Tracking_Chall.enges.................................................................... .............................................10 - --- .-.Common Nuisances.................................................................................................................11 Lead-Cities.........................................................................................12 CitiesAre Standing Alone..............:.........................................................................................12 - - ,..-Fear of Litigation Costs............................................................................................................13 - - _ -- ---State-Actions.................................... .......................................................................................17 HousingElement.....................................................................................................................18 - ....Educating the Public................................................................................................................19 .-How Has This Issue, Evolved? ...................................................................................................23 FINDINGS....................................................................................................................................24 -RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................. 25 - --- RESPONSES -................................................................................................................................. 25 .90 Day_ Response Required ...................................................................................................27 GLOSSARY..................................................................................................................................... 29 -----...BIBLIOGRAPH.Y............................. _............................................................................................... 34 40 --------NOTICE................ ........._._._........,.._............................................................................................... ENDPI OT ES� _�y�.�� �� ...,._.� ��...r...:::....................................................................................... 40 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY Group homes are an important component in the healthcare and/or recovery of many - people. -These -homes provide, among other things, Substance Recovery, Hospice Care, Residential Care for the Elderly, and Sober Living. When group homes are operated for the well-being of.their residents and with respect for their neighbors, they can be an - — ----asset to their -host community. However, they can occasionally become disruptive and the motivation_for.nuisance.calls to local code enforcement. In extreme cases, the - - "curbing" -of residents can contribute to the homeless population. Negative interactions with disruptive group homes often lead to neighborhood opposition and anger towards city officials. How cities respond to the anger of their --constituents-impacts-their.ability to successfully integrate group homes. Residents are -- _ - more likely to -respond positively when cities offer townhall style meetings with police, fire, code_ enforcement, legal, -and subject matter expert involvement, especially where - the-subject--is-discussed-objectively, and public input is encouraged and respected. Issues and concerns. neighborhood residents have with group homes stem primarily from an over -concentration, of homes in residential areas. Multiple cities in Orange County have attempted to manage integration of group homes into neighborhoods by enacting ordinances that include setting a minimum distance between group homes to avoid the -problems _associated with over -concentration. Most cities with such ordinances have not enforced them due to the fear of incurring litigation costs. --------- TheGrandJury reviewed the challenges of successfully integrating group homes into - -neighborhoods, including pressures exerted on Orange County cities by residents, group home operators, and State of California. -The_State-of California -has recently joined the group home debate, has altered the _-conversation, .and -raised the.stakes. The State wields a large club with its power of -approval of -the required. -Housing Element. The California Housing and Community Develop- ent_Department(HCD) is withholding approval for cities that have ordinances attempting to. place-limits.or impose oversight on group homes. Cities are then :...Vulnerable to.a loss of. - control over zoning and permitting, as well as loss of State and regional funding. Some cities have_ decided to push back on the pressures put on them from HCD and the .fight has been carried out on an individual city basis. The Orange County Grand Jury _ x .recommends that the .County of Orange and cities join forces to create ordinances, pool - - resources for defense -of -lawsuits, and work together to generate awareness among legislators -to improve, -regulations and management standards to ensure health and safety for group home residents. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 3 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BACKGROUND Orange County has 42 miles of beautiful coastline, three harbors, and 25 urban and wilderness parks including .230 miles of riding and hiking trails. Orange County also has the dubious honor of. having more than its share of our State's total number of group recovery and sober living residences. Frequently referred to as "The Rehab Riviera", several cities in .Orange County have been dealing with pockets of over - concentration. -of these .types of group homes. This has posed challenges for the residents in whose neighborhoods they are located, as well as the occupants of the recovery and sober living homes. Many of the homes in question are privately owned, unlicensed, unsupervised, and a challenge to monitor and regulate. When a neighborhood has multiple group homes, it becomes a more institutional environment; this alters the character of the neighborhood and defeats the purpose of the "integration" of people who are-recoveririg. _. __. The Orange County coast is a magnet for sober living homes To address _these shortcomings, multiple cities, and the County, on behalf of --::unincorporated areas, -have enacted ordinances that manage the permitting and tracking of group homes. - Several significant pieces of legislation have played a part in the expansion of group - homes. These inciude California's Lanterman Mental Retardation Act (1988), the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, the California Community Care - Facilities. Act, and California's Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000 (Proposition -36 The -resulting deinstitutionalization has had a positive effect on the .. lives of many people. but has. created a challenge for cities as they work towards the responsible integration of -the -group living arrangements necessary to accommodate the impacted population.' ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY2022 12023 Page 4 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD Since deinstitutionalization, the State of California has resisted appeals from local cities to pass permitting laws, distancing requirements, or any type of regulation at all. There is a misconception that these regulatory ordinances are intended to discriminate against people who are disabled due to alcohol and drug addiction, and the State of California has cited this misconception as the guiding principle for its dogged challenge of most attempts by cities to manage the responsible integration of group homes into residential neighborhoods. Rather, -such city ordinances are intended to protect those people who suffer from alcohol -and drug. addiction, as well as the neighborhoods where group homes are located. Licensed residential rehab'programs are subject to the same local laws as single-family - _ homes, and no more. State law imposes fewer restrictions on licensed rehab programs -than other licensed -group homes. The Community Care Facilities Act, from which - alcohol and drugrehab-facilities are exempt, imposes restrictions that protect the character of residential neighborhoods. Under this act, cities receive written notice of a ='proposed facility, -and any city -or county may request denial of the license based on overconcentration of residential care facilities. While alcohol and drug programs that provide 24-hour residential non -medical services to adults recovering from drug or - alcohol abuse must obtain .a. State license, they cannot be regulated any differently from a single-family home if they serve six or fewer people. California Health&Safety Code Sections 1.520.5 and 1267.9 state it is a policy of the State to prevent overconcentration of residential facilities that impair the integrity of -- - residential neighborhoods. Section 1520.5 states that the department shall deny an application -for a.new.residential:facility license if the department determines the facilities - - location -is proximate to an existing residential facility therefore resulting in _.-. -overconcentration. The statute recognized the need for a_ balanced_ policy to pre_v_ent _ overconcentration of residential care facilities which indicates an awareness and - - understanding of=the:-impact of overconcentration on the integrity of residential -neighborhoods. The statute defines overconcentration as less than 300 feet for some -types-of group.homes_and-up to 1000 feet for others. At the time the statute was enacted it was specific only to certain types of group homes. However, the recent -emphasis on providing more housing in California has eroded the intent of this act. Federal -and State fair -housing laws protect people with disabilities from housing _discrimination.' Recovering.. alcoholics and drug addicts are disabled for purposes of anti- discrimination --laws. When. people in recovery live together in a "sober living" home, _._ --_-- cities cannot discriminate -based on such disabilities, therefore an ordinance cannot - treat sober living -homes -differently than other similar uses in single-family residential zones. --Sober living homes are not -required to be licensed and are not limited to six or fewer residents. Because -no _teeatment is provided in these substance -free, mutually supportive living environments, no license is required. The limitation of.most other group ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 5 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD homes to six residents is part of the State statute; however, confusion arises because the statute does not apply to sober living homes. There is only so much a city can do to respond to the complaints of its residents when - dealing with an overconcentration of group homes in a neighborhood. It is important for city residents to be educated on the barriers faced by cities, and to work with their city to overcome these barriers. Current laws -do not adequately address the need to manage the integration of group - homes into neighborhoods. Courts should not be where the solutions are found. REASON FOR STUDY - Many cities within -Orange County have neighborhoods with a dense concentration of group -recovery and -sober living residences. In most circumstances, cities do not know - where these group homes are located unless the homes generate a backlash from neighbors due to -various- types of disturbances. The Grand Jury examined how Orange County cities are managing the distancing of all types of group homes, and the impact group -homes have on :neighborhoods and group home residents when the homes are in close proximity to one another. Group- homes; -most often Recovery and Sober Living homes, and the nuisances that -are -commonly -associated -with them, are not new to Orange County. Neighborhood - - complaints, -concerns from individuals living in or related to residents of group homes, the litigious nature of the relationship between cities and group home operators, and abuse of. -the healthcare system have been in play in Orange County for well over a decade. The Grand Jury began this study by looking at how cities are managing the influx and locations of group homes -and identifying best practices where they are found. The working-pr-emise was that each city is responsible for the integration of group homes, - -which would serve -to -protect the residents of group homes while maintaining the existing neighborhood atmosphere. -Has there -been success addressing the issues associated with group homes and what does that look like? Are cities going it alone or are there county -wide efforts? Has there _been _progress;m-ade -in this area?_ The Grand Jury approached the topic of group home integration seeking answers to these questions with the expectation that there were some systems in placeresultingin the successful integration of group homes. The investigation took.a winding road which revealed that, despite countless attempts at -- change, many of the -problems that surfaced over a decade ago are still present. The Grand Jury found -that successfully implemented solutions have become even more impactful--in.light of the State of California's heavy-handed entry into the debate. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 6 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD METHOD OF STUDY The Grand Jury has evaluated official documents, examined news articles, visited multiple recovery/sober living websites, and assessed secondary sources. The Grand Jury reviewed numerous documents, including the 2022 State of California's Group Home Technical Advisoryz and the 1990 State of California Health and Safety Code.3 To better understand the impact of density, jurors attended townhall and city council meetings virtually, through recordings, and visited neighborhoods in several cities where there is a heavy concentration of group homes. The Grand Jury interviewed numerous subject matter experts, city managers, County and y officials, gislator city atorneys, group estate tprofessionals It also examined cal, sta e,hand nationatl media e agal andndeal reports opinion pieces regarding group recovery and sober living residences. The Findings and Recommendations herein are based on this work. INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS Orange County has -some -:of the heaviest concentrations of group homes and sober living: residences in-the-nation.4 The densities are more than the local population can --bear and residents -believe -the -influx of the group home residents seriously impacts their neighborhoods.- - g y; gro:up home and sober living industry experts cite negative impacts onthe group home residents themselves. - -Operators can open- a -group home where they desire, without having a license or State- _. -: _ ..endomed__oertification;_ and they can open as many group homes as they desire .. --regardless of local -need. Because regulation is slack, cities are challenged to track and regulate the -density Without. any guidance or support from the State. Adding to these concerns is -a recent State of California memorandum titled "Group Home Technical Advisory" that characterizes. any attempts to regulate the homes as discriminatory.5 It seems that method -of .thinking -has no positive effect on how the homes are run or on how the vulnerable residents -in these homes are treated, and quite possibly has the opposite effect. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 7 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD OC Group Home Density Reportedly, Orange County has more than its share of group homes in California, and the country for that matter, specific to housing individuals in need of Recovery/Sober Living Homes.6 There are no existing requirements for sober living homes with six or fewer residents to identify or register themselves as such. It is estimated that -up to 36% of houses required to be licensed (those providing services) .by the State of California as group homes for six or fewer residents are located in Orange County. in addition, there are hundreds of group homes not requiring licensing that exist in Orange County neighborhoods. This lack of identification makes it : extremely, difficult to estimate the total number of sober living homes in our communities.' As documented in numerous city council and townhall meetings, residents and activists have raised concerns about over -saturation and common nuisances to local community governing bodies .(see -Common Nuisances section). In many cases, these are neighborhoods in which multiple group homes are in close proximity (for example three in one cul-de-sac) or individual homes are run with little to no on -site supervision. Neighborhoods are losing their original character and familial aspect, with some _becoming increasingly institutional and others experiencing more of a "frat house" feel.. -_ Residents -of-these -homes are moving in and out at an alarming, transitory rate. - - - - - Ne ghbors-de-scribe:.some of.these group homes as taking no responsibility for the actions of theirinhabitants. Rules and responsibilities are either not imposed or not _ -:__ enforced_by_the-group home operators. The complaints are predominantly related to non -regulated group homes. Over the. last several years, multiple cities in Orange County have sought to find a -:solution to. alleviate -these concerns. Several have performed due diligence to ensure - that any action taken will -provide for neighborhoods to remain neighborhoods, and that -both the disabled and the recovering addicts needing to live in these types of group homes.are in fact living inn -a normalized residential environment that provides the best opportunity to be successful in their recovery. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 8 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD This is not simply a "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) issue or reaction as evidenced by the large number of homes that receive few or no complaints. The need for well -run Recovery/Sober Living Homes is not in dispute. Concerns arise when these homes are poorly run and/or when multiple homes are in close proximity, contributing to the problem of over -concentration. These two circumstances cause changes in the local neighborhood, and it is questionable whether they are aiding the very residents that they are meant to be assisting and whether residents of these homes are integrating into a normalized environment. To that end, various cities have. introduced ordinances toward resolving the problem. Some of these include distancing requirements between group homes ranging from 300 to 1000 feet. Some ordinances require group homes to register or self -identify as such. -_- California Health. Code Section 1267.9 provides specific requirements for distancing of most types of group homes settings.$ These requirements are similar to the local city ordinances in that they provide certain spacing restrictions of between 300 - and1000-feet. Sober. Living Homes, however, are excluded from any distancing requirement by the State. �o�rg a yMaps �. � .. � . •.;. �� . :��� Cleveland EE .Map dsta02MGoo9Ie,1KG1.Terms 24r-.,- or. �►� t� .b'r'xhla+ nasal G'nrnc+ Keyboard Shortcuts Points show the primary addresses of all non -medical alcoholism and drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities licensed andlor.certified by the California Department of Health Care Services as of Mayo, 201 Z (Map bylan Wheeler, Orange County RegisterlSCNG) The' State --imposes licensing requirements on most types of group homes and provides for oversight byone or more State or County agency. Sober Living Homes with six or fewer residents are not required to be licensed by the State and have no regulatory ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 9 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD oversight. These two factors alone allow anyone to set up, open, and advertise this type of group home anywhere in California. Orange County seems to be the favored location, yet has no say in the siting or quantity of group homes in our residential neighborhoods. Tracking Challenges Just where are these sober hiving homes? All over. How do we know? We actually don't. There are -few local ordinances requiring the registration, licensing, or declaration of any -- - type of unlicensed sober living or recovery residence that has been established in a _ neighborhood. There are no widely adopted methods to track or monitor any aspect of such dwellings —their location, number of people residing in them, on -site management, or their ownership. _ The Grand Jury's. research found that most sober living homes are not required by law - - to have -any -kind of State license. Some cities have enacted ordinances that require a _.permit or registration. When a_sober living establishment is registered and a complaint is received, the complaint may be recorded and could be tracked, at least for the location of that specific home. Except_for the.few cities _with.ordinances regulating sober living homes and the few - homes that_applied .for registration or received ministerial permits, accurate tracking and monitoring remains challenging. Tracking is attainable if cities' code and law ._-__enforcement_ establish and actively utilize a searchable database that includes ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY_2022 12023 Page 10 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD information about police and fire calls, nuisance complaints or code infractions, and identification of type of establishment. The use of this information can help identify the location and density of group homes. Common Nuisances Residents living in cities with neighborhoods having a significant number of recovery and sober living homes complain that the proliferation of these group homes in recent years has become unmanageable, and that overconcentration is impacting the quality of life for everyone. For years, many citizens living in neighborhoods with an unrestrained growth of sober living homes have been voicing their concerns and frustrations over the lack of protection their communities are given. While many of these group homes adopt rules and regulations and attempt to be good neighbors, a citizen's primary method for -_ reporting_ concerns about a disruptive home is initiating a nuisance complaint to their local law enforcement. Common Nuisances Secondhand Smoking Vomiting in Driveways Higher -Noise Levels Curbing Box Truck Deliveries Increased Street Parking Substantial Rubbish @ Front Lawns Relapsing in Public Increased Foot Increased Traffic Traffic The outcry. -is that unregulated -sober living residences make for bad neighbors. Sober - living homes. are .not always bad neighbors, but when they are concentrated in a small geographic area:or. neighborhood; ,the common nuisances can become more visible and _ - disruptive. -:Ultimately; -this raises concerns about the potential or actual diminished character of the neighborhood. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 11 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD Although the City of Costa Mesa has been front and center in the legal fights related to group homes, it was Newport Beach that first stepped into the arena in 2008. Three companies sued the City over an ordinance that was approved by the City Council in 2008 that regulated group homes for recovering addicts-9 Pacific Shores Properties, Newport Coast Recovery, and Yellowstone Women's First Step House sued Newport Beach for a total of $5.24 million. Still in place today, this ordinance was the first of its kind in Orange County and it established quiet hours, parking and smoking areas, and van routes. It also required the City's approval for new unlicensed homes for recovering addicts in certain neighborhoods. In 2015, the City reached the end of its seven-year Legal battle -over sober -living homes with a settlement agreement.10 11 According to the Orange County Register, which cites its own archives, Newport Beach spent at least four million dollars in legal costs on the cases. In 2008, there were 81 facilities and 614 total beds identified in Newport Beach. In 2021, there were a known 30 facilities with 210 total beds. Where did all those facilities and beds go?12 Perhaps to the City of Costa Mesa. In 2015, the City of Costa Mesa enacted their own ordinance (amended in 2017) after seeing a sharp increase in the number of sober living homes followed by a steep increase in the number of community complaints. On the heels of the ordinance came the legal challenges, and Costa Mesa prevailed in all challenges until January 2023 when two sober living homes, embroiled in litigation against the city, were handed a legal victory in federal court. The earlier dismissal was reversed and remanded by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which ruled that asking operators of sober living facilities for proof of disability violates federal law barring discrimination against those with disabilities and bars discrimination in housing. As the. legal battle waged on, other local governments explored, advanced, or enacted regulation of sober living homes, including the County of Orange (2015), and Cities of _ - Laguna Hills (2015), San -Clemente (2016), Laguna Niguel (2016), San Juan Capistrano (2016), Anaheim (2020), and Huntington Beach (2020). Most of these entities, perhaps all, -have chosen not to enforce their ordinances out of concern of potential litigation, and are waiting for Costa Mesa's litigation to conclude. Cities Are Standing Alone Multiple cities in the County have executed ordinances to regulate unlicensed group homes. With the exception of the newly formed South Orange County Sober Living and ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 12 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD Recovery Task Force, cities have not collaborated on solutions to shared and common problems. This has been done on an individual basis, with little collaboration among cities. Prior to drafting an ordinance, some cities study the details and effectiveness of other cities' actions, particularly the City of Costa Mesa's ordinance, and use that as a template to draft their own.13 Once enacted, few of the ordinances are being enforced. This lack of enforcement is due to a small number of very specific impediments and concerns. These include: • Fear of litigation costs due to lawsuits filed by group home operators against cities that have enforced ordinances. (The City of Costa Mesa has reportedly incurred over ten million dollars in legal fees in relation to group home litigation.) • Fear of the State of California withholding approval of the Housing Element for cities that have ordinances related to the management of group homes, resulting in the potential loss of state funds and local zoning control. • Lack of enforcement resources. Most cities do not have the staff resources to enforce these ordinances. While individual cities take a wait -and -see approach to follow the progress of other cities that are standing up to the State, little progress is being made. The cities and County of Orange would benefit by working in partnership with one another to garner resources and create a coalition to promote change. While the newly constituted South Orange County Sober Living and Recovery Task Force is a good start, and the first tangible recognition of the need to work together, the Grand Jury recommends a countywide cooperative taskforce. Orange County's cities and unincorporated areas are demographically diverse.The active sharing of ideas, experiences, and information will be valuable to the overall process of developing a worthwhile model ordinance and plan for moving forward in the efforts to protect both the individual characteristics of Orange County neighborhoods, and all individuals living in those neighborhoods. Fear of Litigation Costs Cities are concerned about.the high cost of litigation and the time required to defend ordinances regulating group homes. Private entities have challenged ordinances and in some cases won, and in other cases continued to pursue lawsuits in spite of opposition. In one case, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) requested that the California Department of Justice file a "friend of the court" application to intervene on behalf the litigant in its case against the City.14 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 13 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD Snapshot of Litigation Coasts Two examples of cities being involved in lengthy and costly lawsuits include Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. In 2007, Newport Beach had numerous sober living homes and was facing increasing pressure by residents to regulate them. In January 2008, Newport Beach passed an ordinance, regulating sober living homes. The ordinance was carefully crafted to comply with State and federal law.15 -By-November-2008, several legal actions occurred. -These included: - - - 1.:A lawsuit from a residents' group (the "Concerned Citizens of Newport Beach" or CCNB) arguing that the City did not go far enough in enacting Ordinance 2008- _-05. CCNB.:also sued multiple operators and asked for $250 million in damages from the City; :-._:-.-2.. Two -group h.or ie-operators (Pacific Shores Recovery and Sober Living by the - Sea) filed complaints with the US Department of Housing and Urban .Development (HUD) alleging that the City's ordinance and its practices have discriminated against disabled persons entitled to fair housing; :. 3. Multiple lawsuits were filed by Sober Living By the Sea (SLBTS) alleging that the - - - - - City's group residential uses ordinance was facially discriminatory against persons.in. recovery. The City reached an agreement with SLBTS; 4. The Cityfiled lawsuits against Morningside Recovery and Pacific Shores - - -- -- Recovery, alleging that some of their operations opened illegally during a short- _ term temporary moratorium against the establishment of new group residential _- uses. Pacific Shores Recovery has in turn alleged that the City's group ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 14 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD residential uses ordinance was facially discriminatory against persons in recovery; 5. A cross -complaint by the City against Sober Living By The Sea and other operators that consolidated certain lawsuits in U.S. District Court. chairs are Packed during a discussion_ on -sober -living homes in San Clemente in 2016. (Photo by Matt Masin, Orange County Register, SCNG) 'Subsequently; in 2009, three companies sued the City of Newport Beach over - ordinance,. -claiming. it_violated anti -discrimination and fair housing laws because individuals -recovering from -an _addiction are a protected group. A federal judge ruled in favor of 1he City in 2011: The companies appealed the case and it went to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, _where the Court's majority sided with the group homes, saying there was enough evidence -to, argue discrimination. The Court pointed to comments made during the 2008 hearing, which implied that the City Council was targeting recovery group homes. The City of Newport Beach asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case in 2014, but the _Court declined. The City settled with the group homes for $5.25 million in 2015. The City's estimated legal costs exceeded four million dollars,16 for a total cost close to ten million dollars. The City of Costa Mesa waged._a fierce and costly legal battle to regulate sober living homes for over five years. As noted in the section regarding the State's actions and attitude, Costa Mesa fashioned an ordinance within the limits of State and federal laws ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 15 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD in 2014.17 The City ultimately spent over seven million dollars in litigation, and prevailed in State and federal courts; however, in January 2023, a federal appellate court reversed and remanded the district court's 2020 ruling. Costa Mesa Ordinance.15-11 sets limited standards for three items that address important societal issues, none of which are discriminatory in nature: 1. Spacing (650 feet apart) 2. Background screening of the house manager 3. Process for evicting residents Spacing between group homes maintains the purpose of the facility and residential character of the neighborhood:_ Screening protects the residents of the facility. Through interviewees, the'Grand Jury learned of group home managers with criminal backgrounds and who are themselves currently substance abusers. Standards for - evictions are needed. Through interviews and newspaper articles, the Grand Jury _ - learned of the practice. of "curbing," putting residents out on the curb when their source -of payment runs out or when they are in violation of house rules. This practice is -believed to contribute to homelessness in Orange County. Costa Mesa's ordinance.. serves an important purpose, but the ordinance is still in litigation after several years and at an estimated cost of more than ten million dollars. $ _ - - Other Cities in California and -Orange County are similarly facing lawsuits and costs associated with group home.and sober living ordinances. Cities could pool resources to - mitigate -litigation cost. concerns. A coalition of cities to spread costs is highly recommended. The Grand Jury learned that the lawsuits brought against cities are supported and __—enabled:by_an_:extremely profitable -industry. --According to John LaRosa at ---- MarketResearch.com on February 5, 2020,19 the group home market is 42 billion dollars per :year. Mr. LaRosa :also .noted that the industry needed to be cleaned up as many of _the.:operators _eng.aged_it -overbilling, patient brokering, and deceptive marketing. The well -funded operators are' -supported by industry organizations and associations in their_ lawsuits. -Ind ustr_y-organizations include large groups such as the California - -Consortium of Addiction -Programs and Professionals, Behavioral Health Associates, and -National Sober Living Associates. The websites of any of these organizations and -several others.can be viewed to see the type of support often provided. The organizations not only provide -support for lawsuits, but also assist in lobbying State and federal legislators. -: Many group home.operators.do not want any type of regulation, as evidenced by the - Costa- Mesa an-d -Newport lawsuits, though the Grand Jury found some operators who welcome additional regulation-to,protect the industry from bad operators. In summary, the industry represents_ -a formidable foe in lawsuits due to funding and industry associations. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY..2022 12023 Page 16 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD Zoning ordinances are the primary control local governments have over city land use. The .State of California -has challenged the validity of group home ordinances, thereby inhibiting local governments in addressing group homes through zoning ordinances. If challenged, defense of the ordinances is costly and the alternative is to repeal them, a process that can be politically charged. When Costa Mesa" originally. prevailed in the lawsuits filed against their 2014 sober living ordinance, the Cities of .Encinitas, Huntington Beach, Anaheim and the County of Orange adopted similar ordinances for sober living facilities. In May 2021, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) sent a letter to the City of Encinitas stating -its -ordinance -was. in violation of statutory prohibitions on discrimination in land use. HCD said the city must take immediate steps to repeal the ordinance. HCD's letter to the City of Encinitas noted "The City appears to take significant comfort from certain court opinions, several unpublished, appearing to reject specific, largely .different and distinguishable_ challenges to a different group home ordinance in Costa Mesa, which were brought by private parties rather than the State of California. Those decisions are neither on point nor binding here. "This statement is misleading to the -. general :public because it downplays judicial rulings favoring Costa Mesa's ordinance. 1n May of 2021, HCD sent a"Letter of Technical Assistance" to the City of Anaheim in which they discuss Anaheim's land use regulations. One of the items discussed was a phone call they had with city staff to discuss concerns with the proposed Zoning Code Amendment for group -homes. HCD's concern was that the ordinance "potentially conflict(s) with statutory prohibitions_ on discrimination in land use". - Also -in May of 2021_, HCD sent a "Notice of Violation: City of Anaheim Notice of Violations of Housing Element Law and Anti -Discrimination in Land Use" regarding the denial -of a --conditional use -permit for transitional housing. The California Department of Justice -(DOJ) subsequently joined a civil lawsuit regarding the same action. HCD -believes the_City has failed: to- implement goals, policies, and program actions included - _ --_ -..-in- thehousing element and failed to act consistent with Government Code requirements in applying standards to the approval of the Project. On Decernber.21J-2022, .HCD issued a document titled Group Home Technical - - - Advisory.20 The executive summary includes the following: _ "In recent years, some: -local governments have amended their zoning ordinances - - to add new regulations -for group homes,particularly for recovery residences- . --group homes _that pr_ov_ide housing for persons recovering from alcoholism or drug addiction. These amendments have raised concerns that local governments are not complying with their affirmative obligations under state planning and ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 17 of.42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD zoning laws. to promote more inclusive communities and affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH). These amendments have also generated disputes and confusion over whether local governments are violating fair housing laws by discriminating against persons with disabilities or other protected characteristics." The document -assumes the ordinances are not legally compliant and creates difficulties faced by cities trying to reasonably regulate group homes. The document is labeled a "technical advisory" but reads as a policy statement. There were apparently no public hearings regarding the document. "The These actions by HCD and DOJ, as well as litigation, are challenges municipalities face in adopting ordinances regarding group homes when the courts have found these ordinancescompliant with State and federal laws. This was made evident through interviews with. representatives of -cities. Interviewees also expressed concern that HCD _- - -interpreted the -laws as being overly restrictive on zoning ordinances and failing to protect the inhabitants of group homes. Housing Element - In the -State -of California, -all cities are required to develop a General Plan. The General Plain serves -as a -blueprint for the future, prescribing policy goals and objectives to - shape and -guide the physical development of the city. The General Plan is a at informs future land use decisions, and it is comp -document th comprised of multiple elements.21 The_ Housing -Element _is_one important part of a city or county's General Plan. Every eight:years,` every -city, town, and county must update their Housing Element and have it certified by -the -California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The most:recent-cycle of the new Housing Element has been heavily impacted by the State's laser focus on housing availability and affordability. - - On-September-28 2021--Governor Gavin Newsom signed a suite of bills to boost housing production across_ California which accompanies the Governor's 22 billion - - - housing -affordability and homelessness package and ongoing work by the State to spur more housing production; tackle barriers to construction, and hold local governments - accountable. Taken together, the actions reflect the State's focus on creating more ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 18 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD affordable housing, faster and cheaper. "The acute affordability crisis we are experiencing in California was decades in the making, and now we're taking the necessary steps to fix it," said Governor Newsom.22 - Although this is a response to a real need in California, the real -world consequences to the "build -build -build" solution are many. One of those can be seen in the State's -. - myopic push for housing as it has mistakenly equated group homes with additional housing options. But housing:is not increased by allowing the unbridled proliferation of recovery and sober living homes. The industry advertises heavily outside of California and brings many of their residents from out-of-state. It is not uncommon for some of these residents to be"kicked to the curb" (referred to as curbing) for various reasons, and because _they are -not local to Orange County, they have nowhere to go and ultimately face homelessness. HCD wields its power to review and approve State housing elements as a threat to deter city and county efforts to regulate group homes. Approval of the Housing Element has a big impact on a'city's ability to enforce its general plan and to control what gets built and where it is -built. Without the HCD's approval of the housing element, a door is opened to developers_to.bypass local zoning ordinances by utilizing a seldom used loophole known as Builders Remedy. Under that law, a developer may sidestep city approvals to construct a housing development if 20% of the project's homes are affordable housing.23 .-State funding programs for transportation, infrastructure, and housing often require or consider a local jurisdiction's compliance with Housing Element Law. These competitive funds can be used for fixing roads, adding bike lanes, improving transit, or providing much needed affordablehousing to communities. In some cases, funding from state/federal housing programs can only be accessed if the jurisdiction has a compliant - _ --- housing element.24 25 - -- ---- ---- --- - - - --- _ By -the time- _the -public -has. organized to bring their concerns to city leadership through a : - - - letter writing campaign; _a-joint.written complaint, or a petition, their level of frustration has likely .been.building_ for quite awhile. How city leadership deals with the concerns and frustration's of.their-constituency is likely to determine whether it will be a collaborativeor an.ad.versarial process to find a resolution. Educating the public on the -- _- reasons that -cities _have_seemingly been unwilling to address the integration of group homes into Orange County neighborhoods is key to the success of collaborative problem solving. _ Cities have:-been:-squeezed:from above by a combination of intense pressure from group home operators citing federal protections for the disabled, and the State of California's efforts to eliminate group home ordinances by withholding approval on cities'.mandated -Housing . Element submission. They are also squeezed from below by ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 19 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD the people in neighborhoods which have been impacted by the over -concentration of group homes, and/or the level of nuisances generated by the group homes. f discipline, e to the public A lack of understanding of the challenges faced by cities leads to the perception that they are unwilling to step up and regulate the various group home types that are springing up in neighborhoods. Public education will reveal that there is not an unwillingness of cities, or the public, to find resolutions, but rather there are many hurdles promulgated by State and federal agencies that often prevent opportunities for reaching a solution. Cities should work together, and with State legislators and other stakeholders, to look for ways to affect change at the State level as well as provide more focused public education that addresses these issues. In an effort to inform their citizens, some cities have used the multi -discipline, educational, townhall type response to the public outcry while others have not. The outcome can be quite different. To illustrate, we heed look no further than a tale of three cities: Anaheim, Newport Beach, and Laguna Hills. Anaheim's group home issue heated up in October 2021 when Grandma's House of Hope requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to use a large house as a transitional living home for 19 intractably mentally ill women.26 -_-- It was not Grandma's House -of Hope's first group home in Anaheim; it was the latest in many previously successful CUP requests. Local residents coalesced against this CUP request in a vocal and organized manner. Whether it was the number of residents impacted, the descriptor of the group home residents as intractably mentally ill, or just one group home too many in this neighborhood, this organized effort to prevent the - approval of the large group home attracted hundreds of local citizens and activists from both sides of the issue. It seemed that the majority of these people attended the planning commission meeting to voice their opinions during the public comment portion _- of the.agenda and to let the City's Planning Commission see the strength of their numbers. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 20 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD The Planning Commission was seemingly prepared to accept the staff recommendation for approval. Public comment took over five hours, most of which was overwhelmingly against the approval of the group home. The applicant and the Planning Commission both expressed surprise at the public backlash. Ultimately, the approval recommendation was scrapped, and the Planning Commission voted to deny the CUP. Grandma's House filed an appeal and the application for the CUP was heard by the City -. Council. The public attended that meeting in larger numbers than at the Planning _ Commission meeting .and they were every bit as angry and frustrated as they were at the earlier meeting.In spite of robust response on the issue at the meeting of the Planning Commission just two months earlier, the Anaheim City Council was unprepared for the charged nature of the adversarial clash. Most speakers were passionate but respectful, while some were rude and offensive. It was essentially an angrier :repeat -of the first meeting and led to the same conclusion, a denial of the CUP.27 ----- = - The affected public walked away with no better understanding of the reasons why these group homes are hard --to regulate due to the pressures put on cities by the State of California. The applicant ultimately filed suit against the city alleging violations of the Housing Element Law, Housing Accountability Act, and statutes governing anti- discrimination in local land use laws. iveany zuu people .packed the Mission Viejo City Council chamber on March 29 for a Town Hall meeting regarding sober.livirig. homes. (Tomoya Shimura, Orange County Register, April 1, 2016) The City of Anaheim_ has not _responded to the public concerns in an organized manner. - It has not provided an opportunity for the public to come together in a townhall-like meeting where the -City could address the issues and the challenges they face, have subject matter experts .on hand for short presentations, and allow for comments and questions .28 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 21 of.42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD In direct contrast to Anaheim's response, we can look at the steps taken by the Cities of Newport Beach and Laguna Hills. Newport Beach was faced with a petition from its residents in 2007 after a rapid increase in the number of drug rehabilitation homes. The residents reported 103 treatment houses, nearly all on the Balboa Peninsula. There was a town. hall hosted.by (then) Assemblywoman Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Niguel, and (then) State Senator Tom Harman, R-Huntington Beach, and an estimated 200 people attended. It was an opportunity for dialogue as well as to learn about the constraints placed on cities by the State of California. Newport Beach responded to resident concerns again in late 2021 _by organizing a community meeting with speakers from several city departments, a State Assemblywoman, the District Attorney, and a County Supervisor.29 so Hundreds attend the Sober Living Homes Town Hall meeting at the at the Laguria r1111s t.urnmu111Ly Center on Thursday (Christopher Yee, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, May 13, 2016) We can also look at the steps taken by the City of Laguna Hills. In 2016, the City responded to public outcry regarding group home issues by hosting a Town Hall on the subject. The Town Hall was: hosted by (then) State Senator Pat Bates and several other - State and Iocal,legislators. Also- in attendance were attorneys with extensive knowledge - - of the issue`as-well as other subject matter experts. More than 600 people attended, -and it.was an 'opportunity for. the residents in attendance to gain a better understanding of the challenges the City faces in regulating unlicensed group homes, as well as for the City to hear the concerns and frustrations of attendees. Proving that, when cities work to ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 22 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD inform their constituents, and allow for a robust but respectful dialogue, they create an opportunity for collaborative problem solving.31 Hoer Has This Issue Evolved? 'The timing of this investigation aligned with the required submission of the Housing Element portion of each city's General Plan. The State's disapproval of a city's Housing Element carries heavy consequences, and the State of California has used the withholding of this needed approval to coerce cities to abandon their group home ordinances. The.Grand-Jury was previously -unaware of the power behind group home lobbyists and the number of proposed legislative bills that never made it to a vote. The State's policy - making role limits a city's ability to responsibly manage the integration of group homes and, as a consequence, the trajectory and focus of the study changed and widened with this knowledge. The Grand Jury looked at broader factors influencing the group home industry, its influence, its -effect on communities and often its seeming lack of real concern:about its :clients-. The group home industry is immense, requires improved relations with cities-, and needs more effective local governmental oversight. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND. JURY 2022 12023 Page 23 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD FINDINGS In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2022-2023 Grand Jury_ requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the findings presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled "Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?" the 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury has arrived at eleven principal findings, as follows: F1 -Group homes too close to one another contribute to the problems associated with overconcentration. F2 Common nuisances are more likely and disruptive when sober living homes are concentrated in a small geographic area of a neighborhood. F3 Some cities have successfully addressed and informed community members about the challenges faced in regulating group homes. F4 Community satisfaction was minimal when cities took the traditional public - comment approach towards addressing community complaints. F5- - Cities are not utilizing police, fire, and code enforcement complaints as a means of locating and tracking Group Homes. - --- F6.._-. ----Cities are inhibited from enacting and enforcing ordinances due to fears over the potential cost of litigation. - - _-- __-__ _-- - FT.- Several cities have created an ordinance that requires a ministerial permit or registration.to operate a group home, however many of these cities do not enforce their ordinances. ----- : -City and County officials.are deterred from regulating group homes by California - Housing and -Community Development's housing element approval process. ::Cities have historically strategized and acted independently in addressing group home challenges and solutions. F1Q Vllell-operated group homes can integrate smoothly into neighborhoods. _ F 1 :: ,There is a lack of_.r_eg.ulatory oversight for the health and safety of residents of unlicensed group homes. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 24 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2022-2023 Grand Jury requires (or, as .noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by - the -recommendations _presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled, .'Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?" the 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following five recommendations: R1 Orange County. cities and:the County of Orange should address citizen concerns regarding -group homes- by providing an opportunity for an open dialog where an interdisciplinary panel of subject matter experts can share with attendees the challenges cities are facing in the management of group homes. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F3, F4) R2._ By December 31, 2024, Orange County cities and the County of Orange should collaborate in their efforts to create ordinances for the regulation of group homes, including the development of model ordinances. (F6, F7, F9) R3 Orange County cities and the County of Orange should pool resources for - - - --defense of lawsuits challenging group home ordinances. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F6, F8, F9) - R4 The County of Orange and Orange County cities should create a Task Force that - - _ includes representatives from OC cities, unincorporated areas, and other entities ---r=- .-------as appropriate and charge it with the responsibility of developing -a plan to --- generate .awareness among State legislators and regulators of the need for improved regulations and management standards to ensure health and safety for Group Home -residents. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F2, F10, F11) _ R5 Orange: -County cities and_the County of Orange should modify code enforcement report data collection forms to include a searchable field that enables the -_ identification of a residence operating as a group home. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F5, F7, F11) RESPONSES California Penal CodeSection933 requires the governing body of any public agency -_which--the--Grand--Jury -has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the_ Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to -.matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later:than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 25 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official's control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: - - -- (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2)The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.. - - -- -- (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and scope and parameters of an analysis or study, --and a time frame for - the matter._to-.be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency.:or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame _shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c)-If -a-finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or - - personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected _. officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors - - -_- - ° - shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors -shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision -making authority. The response of the elected ..-agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or -recommendations affecting his or her agency or department, ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY.2022 12023 Page 26 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD The Orange County Grand Jury requires and requests the following responses: County of Orange Board of Supervisors F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 County of Orange Board of Supervisors R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 City Councils of: Aliso Viejo Aliso Viejo Anahei ..Anaheim Brea - - - Brea Buena Park _ Buena Park - Costa -Mesa Costa Mesa Cypress Cypress Dana Point Dana Point Fountain Valley Fountain Valley - Fullerton -_ - Fullerton -- Garden -Grove Garden Grove - Huntington -Beach Huntington Beach - fr-vine - _-- - rvine La Habra - La Habra La Palma- .. __ La Palma Laguna Beach - Laguna Beach - Laguna :Hills - -- -- -- Laguna Hills Laguna Niguel Laguna Niguel Laguna Woods F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 111, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7_, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 27 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD Laguna Woods Lake Forest Lake Forest Los Alamitos Los Alamitos Mission Viejo Mission Viejo Newport Beach Newport Beach Orange Orange Placentia Placentia RanchoSantaMargarita_: - Rancho Santa Margarita .San Clemente San Clemente .San Juan Capistrano San Juan Capistrano - - - Santa -Ana - - Santa Ana Seal Beach - __ Seal Beach - .. Stanton Stanton __. Tustin W_ .. :Tustin Villa Park - Villa Park Westmin Westminster .Yorba Linda - -Yorba Linda R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 __.___- F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 F1, F2,F3,F4,F5 , F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 28 of 42 1 GLOSSARY 2 ADU 3 4 _ An -accessory dwelling unit, usually just called an ADU, is a secondary housing 5 unit on a s ingle-family residential lot. These may be converted garages, backyard 6 cottages, or granny flats, for example. 7 8 Brokering 9 10 A referral system where money or other inducements are exchanged by owners of 11 _ : , disreputable homes toget: new clients. The recipients may be residents, clinics, or even 12 - members of self-help groups such as AA12-step programs. 13 14 Code Enforcement 15 ----16---- Activity by local -government agencies to identify and correct problems and abuses by 17 citizens and businesses. 18 19 Congregate Care Living 20 21 -A residential home that offers- inpatient services to its residents. Generally, the care that 22 - -this -institution provides':is more -intense than what a skilled nursing care facility offers but 23' _ less intense than what a general acute care hospital provides. 24 25 Curbing 26 27= The`act of evicting residents; often done late at night, -so-called because -they and - --- _ 28 -their belongings_ are sent to the curb. Eviction may occur when such residents' _ 29. insurance runs out -or for violating house rules. They frequently have nowhere to go and -- 30____ often- have no resources, essentially rendering them homeless. 31 32 Deinstitutionalization 33 34 " ' The closing (or reduction of -services) of residential facilities, often referred to as mental 35- hospitals; and the _reliance on smaller, more personal "homes" as a means of 36 rehabilitation. 37 38 Detox 39 -40 Program or facility for -assisting a person undergoing treatment from an intoxicating or 41 addictive substance. 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 43 EBT 44 45 Acronym for Electronic Benefit Transfer, previously known as Food Stamps, these are 46 debit cards issued to eligible participants for the purpose of buying food and other 47 necessities. 48 49 Emotional Wellness Homes 50 51 A facility where a person develops the ability to handle their emotions and varied -- 52 - -experiences they encounter -in life. Emotional wellness is an awareness, understanding, 53 and acceptance.of our feelings and the ability to manage and change challenges 54 effectively. 55 56 Good Neighbor Policy 57 58 A set of principles and activities designed to provide a consistent means of 59 communication between facilities that provide resident services and their respective 60 neighbors. The Good Neighbor Policy is applicable for Residential Programs when -61 . residents and the services have a potential impact including but not limited to 62 community safety, cleanliness, and security in the surrounding neighborhood(s). 63 64 Group Home (GH)* 65 66 Aresidential unit utilized. as a supportive living environment for people meeting the legal 67 definition of disabled. Provides housing only for a classified group of people. No medical 68-- care, services, or treatment.can take place in a Group Home. Only State -licensed 69___facilities can provide_care,_.services, or treatment under State law (see Residential 70 Care Facilities) - - -- - 71 72 Hospice 7 73-:Aaype of-healtlrcare.that-focuses on the palliation of a terminally ill patient's pain and - 75:.: symptoms -and attending to their emotional and spiritual needs at the end of life. -76 Hospice care prioritizes comfort and quality of life by reducing pain and suffering. 77 78 Housing Element 79 80 .. _Since1969' California has -required that all local governments (cities and counties) 81 : -adequately;plan.to.meetthe:-housing needs of everyone in the community. California's - -82 :: local. -governments meetthis requirement by adopting housing plans as part of their -83 "general plan" (also required by the state). General plans serve as a local .84 . -, governments ."blueprint for. -how the city and/or county will grow and develop and -__85 --_include eight elements.: -land use, transportation, conservation, noise, open space, 86 safety, environmental justice, and housing. 87 88 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 202212023 Page 30 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 89 Integral Facilities 90 91 Integral facilities means any combination of two or more facilities located on the same or 92 different parcels, collectively serving seven or more persons, not including the licensee - --93- - or -members -of the licensee's family or persons employed as facility staff, that are under 94 the control or management of the same owner, operator, management company or 95 licensee or any affiliate of any.of them, and which together comprise one operation. 96 _ Integral facilities shall include, but not be limited to, the provision of housing in one 97_ facility -and recovery programming, treatment, meals, or any other service or services at 98 another facility, or facilities, or by assigning staff, or a consultant or consultants, to .99 provide services to or in more than one facility. 100 101 Licensing 102 - - - 103 A permit from an-authorityao. own or use something or to do a particular thing or carry 104 on a trade. In reference to this report's subject matter, licensing from a State or county 105 agency or department. 106 107 Like -for -Like 108 109 Identifying the spacing of group.homes by type, e.g., sober living within a given distance 110 of sober living, assisted living within a given distance of assisted living, etc. Sober living 111 -near assisted living does not meet the like -for -like criteria. 112 113 Model Ordinance 114 - 115- A common set of- policies and procedures developed by a government agency to 116_ oversee the licensing and operation of group homes. .117- 118 NIMBY 119 _-_120---Acrori_ym_for "Not-in_My_Bacl<-ya.rd". A term used, among other things, to identify citizens 121 _ :: -who object to having group homes in their neighborhood. 122 123 Referral Facility 124 125- Either a Residential Care Facility, Group Home, or Sober Living Home where one or -=126- more person's residency-{s-pera court order or similar directive. Referral facilities must .127 follow the permit procedure according to the base use classification, and are not _128_ .. permitted in the RL (Residential Low Density) zone. 129 130 Rehab Riviera 131 132 :: The _nickname given to. some sober living facilities in Southern California, referring to the 133 climate:.Often used as --a selling point in advertising to emphasize the outdoor appeal of 134 homes in the region. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 31 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 135 136 Rehabilitation 137 138 The action of restoring someone to health or normal life. Care that can help one get 139 back, maintain or improve abilities. 140 141 Residential Care Facilities (RCF)* 142 143 A State Licensed residential facility where care, services, or treatment are provided to 144-. persons living in a community residential setting. Provide housing and care/treatment 145 for the elderly, developmentally disabled, chronically ill, and chemical addiction 146 -treatment facilities, among -others. RCFs that specifically provide drug and or alcohol 147 abuse treatment are licensed by the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and 148 are known as'alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities. 149 Homes are required to be licensed by the DHCS when at least one of the following 150 services is provided: detoxification, group counseling sessions, individual counseling 151 sessions, educational sessions, or alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment 152 planning. 153 154 Residential Treatment Centers 155 156 Sometimes known as rehab -which is a live-in health care facility providing services for - - 157 _ substance Use -disorders, mental illness, or other behavioral problems. 158 159 Saturation 160 161:. _Having several group homes within a neighborhood. 162 ---- 163 Single Housekeeping Units ---- 164 -165 Individuals-occupyinga dwelling unit that have established ties and familiarity with each 166 other; share a -lease agreement, have consent of the owner to reside on the property, or _-:167 own the property; jointly use -common areas and interact with each other; and share the --:_-168--- household -expenses -such -as -rent or ownership costs, utilities, and other household and 169 maintenance costs activities. 170 171 Six or Under 172 173 'Homes with -six or -fewer -residents. Under State law these may not be required to be 174 licensed or registered. 175 176 Sober Living Home (SLH)* 177 178 Sober Living -Homes -are also -group homes, but specifically for people recovering from 179: a. chemical addiction that meets the legal definition of disabled. Provides "housing 180_. - only" that is primarily meant for people who have just come out of rehab and need a ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 32 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 181 place to live that is structured and supportive for those in recovery. For the purposes of 182 the Ordinance, a Sober Living Home is not state licensed. No medical care, services, or 183 treatment can occur in a Living Home. Only State licensed facilities can provide care, 184 services, or treatment under State law (see Residential Care Facilities). 185 186 Tracking 187 188 A method to obtain data, monitor movements and a system to identify and map the 189 location of group homes. 190 191 Treatment Center 192 193 A facility where a client or clients go under one roof for services to improve their 194 physical or mental health. A residential treatment center (RTC), sometimes called 195 rehab, is a live-in health care facility providing therapy for substances abuse use 196 disorders, mental illness, or other behavioral problems. Residential treatment may be 197 considered the "last-ditch" approach to treating abnormal psychology or 198 psychopathology. 199 200 *For the purposes of this report, the City of Huntington Beach's definitions of group living 201 homes is being used as published on the city's website. 202 Qi1C? ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 33 of 42 P"7 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 204 BIBLIOGRAPHY 205 Teri Sforza, Will-U.S. Supreme Court engage on Costa Mesa's sober living rules?, Orange County 206 Register, Wednesday, March 15, 2023 207 Teri Sforza, Addiction centers flee Costa Mesa, move to less regulated OC cities, Orange County 208 Register, Sunday, February 19, 2023 209 -David Zisser, Letter from CA Department of Housing and Development to City of Huntington 210 Beach Planning Department - RE "Ordinance to Ban "Builder's Remedy" Projects under the 211 Housing Accountability Act (HAA) — Notice of Potential Violation", California Department of 212 Housing and Community Development web site, Monday, February 13, 2023 - - .213 .. Ring Bender Law, SoCal Recovery and Raw Recovery v City of Costa Mesa: Amici Curiae Brief Of 214 -The League Of California Cities, The -Association Of California Cities Of Newport Beach, Fountain 215 Valley, Mission Viejo, And Orange In Support Of Appellee's Petition For Rehearing En Banc, 216 Court Filings, Thursday, February 9, 2023 217 Teri Sforza, Sober homes gain some ground in fight with Costa Mesa, Orange County Register, 218 Sunday, January 15, 2023 219 .- Covenant Hills, Day Patient and Outpatient Addiction Treatment in Orange County, YouTube 220 Posting, Friday, November 4, 2022 221 General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, 222 -Orange County -Sober Living l Sober Living Near You in SoCal (kaizenhouse recovery.com), 223 Wednesday, October 19, 2022 _. 224.-General-Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, Seber Living-Homesfor Men & W General Information omen -Orange County Recovery, 226 Wednesday, October 19, 2022 227- _General -Information; Links -To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, 228 -Orange .County Sober Living Homes I Sober Living Homes near me 229(ocsoberlivingbestsolution.com), Wednesday, October 19, 2022 -- 230-- Generakknformation, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, Drug 231 Rehab Orange County = Lighthouse Treatment Center, Wednesday, October 19, 2022 - _ 232 :_:.General:Information; Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, _ 233 Huntington, Beach Rehab I Drug & Alcohol Substance Abuse Recovery -234 -16rangecountyrecovery.com), Wednesday, October 19, 2022 - ' - 235 General -information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, 236 SoberLiving.Homes in Southern California - Elysium Health Care, Wednesday, October 19, 2022 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 34 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 237 General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, 238 Zinnia Healing - Drug & Alcohol Rehab (serenitylodgelakearrowhead.com), Wednesday, October 239 19, 2022 - 240 General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, 241 California.addiction.rehab centers_(sunshinebehavioralhealth.com), Wednesday, October 19, 242 2022 243 General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, 244 Halfway Houses I % way Houses I Sober Homes in California (addictionblog.org), Wednesday, 245 October 19, 2022 246 General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, .247 Requirements, For -California -Rehabilitation and Sober Living Houses (hypogalblog.com), 248 Wednesday, October 19, 2022 249 General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, A 250 Place for Mom, Wednesday, October 19, 2022 251 Jeff Collins; These Southern:California governments have approved housing plans, Orange 252 County Register, Tuesday, October 18, 2022 - 253 Jeff Collins, Most Southern California cities miss complete new deadline to complete housing 254 plans, Orange County Register, Tuesday, October 18, 2022 255 Alicia Robinson, Anaheim should allow home for homeless women with mental health issues, 256 California Attorney General says, Orange County Register, Wednesday, October 5, 2022 257 Alicia Robinson, -Anaheim should allow home for homeless women with mental health issues, 258; California Attorney General says, Orange County Register, Tuesday, October 4, 2022 Pu.blic Notice - City.of Mission.Viejo,.:Council passes Sober Living and Group Home Ordinance to _ 260 _ ensure such facilities operate:with the confines of the law, City of Mission Viejo web site Home 261 I City of Mission Viejo, Wednesday, August 24, 2022 _ 262 -- Public Notice; -Council passes Sober Living and Group Home Ordinance to ensure such facilities 263- operate within the confines of the law, City of Mission Viejo website 264 https:Hcityofmissionviejo.org/, Wednesday, August 24, 2022 _ 265 Teri Sforza, Rehab Riviera: New-law.hopes to keep misleading rehabs from misleading patients, 266 families =patients, families, Orange County Register, Wednesday, August 24, 2022 -267 Teri-Sforza;-California-rehab doctor pleads guilty to insurance fraud, Orange County Register, 268 Tuesday, August 16, 2022 269:=-__ Vanessa:SeM6,'Reziklife Frankenstein' Beverly Hills surgeon and his girlfriend plead guilty to 270--$600 Million fraud scheme: Used _'body brokers' to find drug addicts to get unnecessary shots so ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 35 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 271 they could bill insurance companies to fund their life of luxury, DailyMail.com, Tuesday, August 272 16, 2022 273 California Codes, Various Codes, California Code Search "Text" of the following- using "sober" 274 and "living"., Monday, August 8, 2022 275 City of Laguna Beach Department of Community Development, City of Laguna Beach General 276 Plan Housing Element, City of Laguna Beach Web Site 638115638915170000 277 (lagunabeachcity.net), Thursday, July 21, 2022 278 Matt Meyer, What is 'California sober' — and does it actually work?, Nexstar Media Inc Fox 279 News San Diego, Saturday, June 25, 2022 280 Website Information Idea Flight, 9 Different Types of Group Home in California, Idea Flight Web 281 Site Page 9 Different Types of Group Home in California - ideaflight, Friday, April 1, 2022 - _-_ 282 City of Westminster; Adopted Housing Element 2021-202-, City of Westminster website - 283 https://www.westminster-ca.gov/, Wednesday, January 26, 2022 284 Scott D. Tenley and Kelly M. Hagemann of Michelman & Robinson LLP, Federal Authorities Have 285 Their Eyes On Sober Living Home Operators And Marketers, Especially In Orange County, 286 Mondaq web site, Friday, November 19, 2021 - 287 City of Newport Beach, Community Meeting on Group Residential Uses Meeting Summary, City - 288 of Newport Beach web site City of Newport Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Monday, 289 October 11, 2021 290 City of Newport.Beach, Power Point from Community Meeting Sober Living Homes, Group ___ __291__ Homes,_ a rid -State -Licensed Residential Care Facilities, City of Newport Beach web site _City _of 292. Newport Beach-1 Home newportbeachca.gov), Monday, October 11, 2021 _ - 293---Cit"ewport Bea-ch; Document Lomparing City of Newport Beach Group Home Ordinance to 294 City'of Costa Mesa Group Home Ordinance, City of Newport Beach web site City of Newport 295 Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Friday, September 24, 2021 = 296 Staff, How to Open -a Sober Living Home in California, Blog Post at Sober Living App, Tuesday, 297 May 11, 2021 298- Web Site Posting, How Much Profit Can Be Made From a Halfway House?, HALFWAY GROUP - 299. LLC website How Much Profit Can Be Made From A Halfway _ 300 House?.openupahalfwayhouse.com), Tuesday, February 2, 2021 301 County -of Orange Press Release, Ending Rehab Riviera: Orange County First, County of Orange 302 website, Thursday, October 1, 2020 303 County of Orange; County of Orange Group Home Ordinance, County of Orange website, 304 Tuesday, July 28, 2020 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 36 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 305 David Gorn, Doing the 'sober -living dance' on the Orange County coast, CalMatters, Tuesday, 306 June 23, 2020 307 Elysia Richardson, Do Drug Treatment Centers Increase Local Crime Rates?, California Highlands 308 Vista Drug Treatment Centers Web Site https:Hcaliforniahighlandsvistas.com/blog/crime- 309 rates/, Monday, February 10, 2020 310 . Orange.County Public Works,.Fact Sheet on Group Home Requirements, County of Orange 311 website https://myoceservices.ocgov.com , Saturday, February 1, 2020 -- -312 Michelle Mears, OrangeCountyTackles Homeless Issue by regulating Group Homes, Glove, 313 Friday, September 27, 2019 . -314 Michelle Mears, Orange County Tackles Homeless Issue by Regulating Group Homes, California 315 Globe, Friday, September 27, 2019 316 City of Newport Beach, Group Home List, City of Newport Beach web site City of Newport .317 Beach..I..Home newportbeachca.gov), Thursday, September 19, 2019 _ 318 Frank Kim, OC County Executive Officer, Memo regarding proposed ordinance to regulate Sober 319 Living Homes, County of Orange Web Site, Wednesday, June 19, 2019 _ 320 California Department of Social Services,.Overview of the Group Home Rate Classification 321: Levels, DSS Website information sheet, Thursday, April 4, 2019 322 Miami -Dade County Form, Miami -Dade County Group Home Application, Miami -Dade County 323 - Website.Group Home Application -no aff disc 2019 (miamidade.gov), Monday, April 1, 2019 324 _ ,Steven P. Dinkin, Utilizing th&S.afe. Streets Now playbook, San Diego Union -Tribune, Sunday, 325 January 13, 2019 .-326 :. Brady.P. Horn, AakritJoshi, Johanna Catherine Maclean, Substance Use Disorder Treatment =_ 327--Centers And Property Val-aes-National Bureau Of Economic Research, Tuesday, January 1, 2019 -328 Teri Sforza;-New rehab Laws_ may revamp addiction treatment in California, Orange County 329 Register, Thursday, September 27, 2018 330- -'City -of Laguna Niguel; -Group Home Permit Application, City of Laguna Niguel website 331:.:..https:Hcityoflagunaniguel.org/, Wednesday, July 4, 2018 - 332- - :William_ Leonard, Sober living -homes in Orange County California, Sober Living Local, Saturday, 333 May 5, 2018 - --334 Tony Saavedra -Teri Sforza, Death in rehab generates $7 million award, Orange County Register, 335 Sunday, February 18, 2018 -336 - Teri-Sforza,-Tony-Saavedra,-Quest for sobriety often ends in sexual assault at some rehabs in 337 Southern California, Orange County Register, Friday, January 19, 2018 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 37 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 338 US Department of Health and Human Services, Ensuring Beneficiary Health and Safety in Group 339 Homes Through State implementation, DHSS Web Site 340 https://www.hhs.gov/guidance/document/joint-report-ensuring-beneficiary-health-and-safety- - 341 - group -homes -through -state, Wednesday, January 10, 2018 342 Teri Sforza; Rehab Riviera: California testing Vermont's model to fight addiction, Orange County 343 Register, Friday, December 29, 2017 344 Teri Sforza, Tony Saavedra, Scott Schwebke, Rehab Riviera: Industry struggling to get clean, 345 Orange County Register, Friday, December 29, 2017 346__ - Teri Sforza; Rehab Riviera:Are drugs for drug addicts a solution or a crutch?, Orange County 347 Register, Thursday, December 28, 2017 - _348 Tony Saavedra, Scott Schw_ebke, How a multimillion -dollar empire built around urine drug tests 349 exposes flaws in California's -rehab laws, Orange County Register, Sunday, December 17, 2017 350 =Jordan Graham, Are drug rehab -centers fueling homelessness in Southern California?, Orange 351 County Register, Sunday, December 17, 2017 352 Teri Sforza, Are implants for'opioid addicts a new hope or a new scam?, Orange County 353 Register, Sunday, October 22, 2017 354 Teri Sforza; San Clemente's'discriminatory' rules on addiction treatment centers intact after _ 355 suit settles, Orange County Register, Wednesday, July 5, 2017 356: _ Teri Sforza,_ California the over -regulator? Not for addiction treatment, Orange County Register, 357 Friday, June 23, 2017 35& ' Teri-Sforza,-Addictior treatment: The new gold rush. 'It's almost chic',Orange County Register, 359 Friday, June 16, 2017 US Congress -Committee on Energy and Commerce, Letter to Thomas E. Price, M.D. Secretary 361 -U-S. Department of Health and Human Services Regarding problems resulting from the 362 __ _. dramatic surge. of_addictian treatment centers and "sober living" homes, Congressional Record, 363 Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - -- 364 ----Scott Schwebke,-Teri Sforza, -Federal agents search Sovereign Health rehab in San Clemente, - - _ 365.. _ elsewhere, Orange County Register, Tuesday, June 13, 2017 __- 366 ---California Department -of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division, Power Point on 367- - Orange County Regional Office and what it does Newport Beach Meeting, Web Site of - 368---- Department of Social Services www.ccld.ca.gov, Thursday, June 1, 2017 369 :Ter-i-Sforza,-Detox can end in death at some 'non -medical' Southern California rehabs, Orange 370 County Register, Tuesday, May 23, 2017 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 38 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 371 Todd Harmonson, Sean Emery, O.C. District Attorney charges family, doctors with insurance 372 fraud related to sober living homes, urine tests, Orange County Register, Tuesday, May 23, 2017 373 Teri Sforza, Tony Saavedra, Scott Schwebke, Lori Basheda, Mindy Schauer, Jeff Gritchen, Ian 374 Wheeler, How some Southern California drug rehab addiction centers exploit addiction, Orange 375 County Register, Sunday, May 21, 2017 376 . Teri Sforza, Is there .a link between neighborhood rehab programs and petty crime in 377 California?, Orange County Register, Sunday, May 21, 2017 378- Staff Report, The Southern California rehab industry spans the nation, Orange County Register, 379 Sunday, May 21, 2017 380 - Jan Wheeler, Registered -Rehabs Map, Orange County Register, Thursday, May 4, 2017 381 Mindy Schauer, Heroin's hold: -One man's journey through the Southern California rehab 382 industry, Orange County Register, Monday, May 1, 2017 383 CBS News, OC Neighbors Not Comfortable Next to Sober Living Homes, YouTube Posting, 384 Tuesday, November 29, 2016 385 California Research Bureau, Sober Living Homes in California: Options for State and Local 386 Regulation, California Research Bureau Publication in State Library 387 - https://www.Iibrary.ca.gov/crb/, Friday, October 7, 2016 388 Amy -A. Mericle, Katherine J. Karriker-Jaffe,.Shalika Gupta, David M. Sheridan, Doug L. Polcin, 389 _ Distribution and Neighborhood Correlates of Sober Living House Locations in Los Angeles, 390 American Journal of Community Psychology, Thursday, September 1, 2016 - -391 Teri Sforza,-California argues -sober home ordinances are illegal, forcing cities to make expensive -------392-- decisions, Orange County Register, Saturday, December 19, 2015 _ --- --393 l_Murphy - City -of La -M.esa;Fact'Sheet, Residential Care Facilities (or "Group Homes") in the City _ ___394 - _of_La-Mesa, City of La_Mesa w6bsiie http://www.cityoflamesa.com, Thursday, October 29, 2015 -- _395 .-County of Orange published_guideline, Orange County Adult Alcohol And Drug Sober Living 39-6 _. _ Faciiities-Certification Guidelines, County of Orange Sheriff Departments website, Monday, 397 January 27, 2014 398 Sober Living bythe:Sea,: Drug.Re.hab and Alcoholism Treatment OC CA by Sober Living by the 399 Sea, YouTube Posting, Wednesday, May 23, 2012 400. - You.Get Me3, Santa Ana-Ssober Living Homes, YouTube Posting, Saturday, July 3, 2010 401 Paul 1-Weinberg, Alcohol And Drug Rehab Homes classic Nimbyism Or Everyone's Fair Share, 402 Thomson Reuters/West -403. _', Zoning and Planning Law Report, Wednesday, October 1, 2008 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 39 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 404 City of Newport Beach, City of Newport Beach Residential Group Home Permit, City of Newport 405 Beach web site City of Newport Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Friday, February 1, 2008 406 David DeBerry, Group Homes in the Neighborhood, Western City, Friday, September 1, 2006 407 NOTICE 408 409. . 410 411 412 413 Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929. requires. that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. END NOTES Group Homes in the Neighborhood David Debarry, Jeff Bellinger, Western City 09-01-2006 - : -- https://www.westerncity.com/article/group-homes-neighborhood ? Ibid. Division of Housing Policy Development. "Group Home Technical Advisory." California Department - of Housing and Community Development, December 2022, _.https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/planning-and-community/group-home-technical-advisory- 2022.pdf 3 CA Health & Safety Code Section 1267.9 4 Sforza Terri. "California the -over -regulator? Not for addiction treatment." Orange County Register, June - 23;.2017:_https://www.ocregister.c4om/2017/06/23/california-the-over-regulator-not-for-addiction- treatment 5 ibid :_r_Division of Housirig Policy Development. `Group Home Technical Advisory." California _ :Department of Housing and Community Development, December 2022. httpsa/www.hcd.ca.gov/site§`dbfaUlt/files/docs/planning-and-community/group-home-technical-advisory- 2022.pdf s Sforza, Terri. "California.the.over-regulator? Not for addiction treatment." Orange County Register, June 23,-2017 https.//wWw.ocrbdister.c6om/2017/06/23/california-the-over-regulator-not-for-addiction- treatment/ California Research Bureau, Sober.Living Homes in California: Options for State and Local Regulation, California Research Bureau Publication in State Library_Friday, October 7, 2016, https://www.library.ca.gov/crb/, 8 CA Health & Safety Code Section 1267.9 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 40 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 'Orange County Register Megan Nicolai, July 15, 2015, Newport Beach Settles legal battle over Sober - Living homes. 10 Orange County Register Megan Nicolai, July 15, 2015, Newport Beach Settles legal battle over Sober - Living homes. 11 Los Angeles Times Susannah Rosenblatt, May 22, 2008, Sober living homes rushing to meet Newport's deadline. 1-?-Community Meeting on Group Residential Uses October 11, 2021 Meeting Summary https://nbpd.newportbeachca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/70754/637703409585700000 13 New regional task force will tackle issues with sober living and recovery homes,News Category, City of Mission Viejo Public Notices, September 1, 2022, new regional task force will tackle issues with sober living and recovery homes I City of Mission Viejo 14 Grandma's House of Hope v. City of Anaheim and City Council of Anaheim Case No. 30-2022- 0124183-CU-WM-OJC 15 Newport Beach Ordinance 2008-05 16 Orange County Register Megan Nicolai, July 15, 2015, Newport Beach Settles legal battle over Sober - Living homes_ 17 City of Costa Mesa Ordinance Chapter 13-3001 '.'-Orange County. Register Article, May 21, 2021 - State argues sober home ordinances are illegal, forcing cities to make expensive decisions 1' $42 Billion U.S. Addiction Rehab Industry Poised for Growth, and Challenges (marketresearch.com) - - 20 Ca Department Of Housing And Community Development, Group Home Technical Advisory, dated December 2022 21 Housing Element Update, 2021-2029 Planning Period FAQ & Fact Sheet,City of Arcadia https:/Icros9files.revize.com/arcadia/Shape%2OArcadia/Development%2OServices/planning/Housing%20 Element%Q20Update/FAQ/Housing%20EIement%2OFact%2OSheet_FINAL.pdf 2-www.gov.ca.gov/2021/09/28/governor-newsom-signs-legislation - - -- -- 23 Growing List of Penalties for Local Governments Failing to Meet State Housing Law, Association of Bay Area Governments, June 2021,/https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021- -- -----_=-=-06/Consequences%20of%20Non-Compliance%20with%20Housing%20Laws. pdf - 24_Housing Element Update, 2021-2029 Planning Period FAQ & Fact Sheet,City of Arcadia https:Hcros9files.revize.com/arcadia/Shape%20Areadia/Development%2OServices/planning/Housing%20 Element%20Update/FAQ/Housing%20EIement%2OFact%2OSheet_FINAL.pdf _ 25 Housing Element Update, 2021-2029 Planning Period FAQ & Fact Sheet,City of Arcadia https://cros9files.revize.com/arcadia/Shape%2OArcadia/Development%2OServices/planning/Housing%20 _..:Element%20Update/FAQ/Housing%20EIement%2OFact%2OSheet_FINAL.pdf ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 41 of 42 WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD 26 Walker, Theresa OC Register 10-25-2021 Housing for mentally ill homeless women draws heated Anaheim response https://www.ocregister.com/2021 /10/25/housing-for-mentally-ill-homeless-women-draws-heated-anaheim- response/ 27 Grandma's House of Hope v. City of Anaheim and City Council of Anaheim Case No. 30-2022- 0124183-CU-WM-OJC 28 City of Anaheim Planning Commission,PC Action Packets 8-30-2021 - https://records.anaheim.net/CityCJerk/DocView.aspx?id=2428318&dbid=0&repo=ClTYOFANAHEIM -29 Many attend town hall on rehab houses OC Register, 2-23-2007 Many attend Newport town hall on rehab houses — Orange County Register (ocregister.com) 30 Ibid. Many attend town hall on rehab houses 31 Sober Living Homes Town Hall O aNO FHT ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 42 of 42 9.33 and &933.OS rand Jury has bolded those words in §= California Penal Code S eetions the g' duce grand jury regttests for additional response information, (Note: To re ro riately included in a response.) nd which should be app p r calendar year. Final reports on any 'din 'udge of the superior coy fiscal o realm of its findings he tenn of service the a Each grand jury shall submit to the press o g rent matters during during departments, 933.. (a tions that pertain to country g of the superior court at any time during t enda the residing judge agencies, recoinm be submitted to p ent to responsible officers, appropriate subject maythe 11YPC1lIrng �ilC�gP that t�1P YPinYf 1,, to may be submitted for coenm n finding of he presl her designees shall, upon rand jury A final report Y �nY ;,Then applicable, Upon "erson and his or of a g n„nt,, hoard of swpe..iso' . the forep including the c.""' s after the end of the term, ort liance with this title shall be liance with this title. For. 4�;.,day • the recommendations of thee grid to be in comp comp be available to clarify reasonable ediatelY notice, ° ether.. with the responses thereto, - ort� t..g - - ach: final rep_ � who shall retain that report and all responses e d remain on file in the office oWthe clerk. The clerk spa untn (b) _One copy of -- placed on file with the cleric of the'court an- . ublic agency subject to its e co of the report an d-the.xesponses to the State Archives erations of any p su erior court forwar44. ro .. copy residing judge of thep submits a final report on the op in peYpetn'' rand jtirJ' ublic ag Y overriing body, and every elected s after_the g of .the p enc shall comment to e p (c) -No later than:90 day- thfte ye_rning body _ authority, ertatning to.matters under the control of the! g reviewing . u has responsibility pursuant to s nt t the board of supe comment sons, grand jury -onthe: findtngsand recommendatioilsp officer or agency head and officer .or agency head - for which the. gm superior court, with an information cop the mayor county resd'uig judge of the sup city and county, within 60 days to the: p eildations pertaining to. Matters III o�conirolst In anyin tYbt s and recomen agency head s p rand that Of or ag Y of all responses to g - on the finding agencies which-- dations. All of these comments and oPY shall forthwith enc . .0 any. agency ot:ag •- s artd recommend, impaneled the grand) ry rk, _ clerk, or the mayor shall-E. so comment. on the ud to o fthe-Superior court who imp enc and the office of the county applicable grand residing J -� ublic ag y laced on file with the submitted to the:p copy shall be p laced on file -vatth tP_,n those of t e p where it shall be maintained for a oits-shall be p rand fury, jury Yep and shall remain o. file in those offices. One g licable,. when.app and in flee control of the currentlyimp )u.y finalreport. y nlirrlmum of five years. ,� enc includes a department. the responding person or entity shall (d) As used in this section ag y as t° eac11 grand Jury finding, cfton 933;:. . • b of Se. ur oses of subdivision �) the ortion 933.63. (a): For-p . p indicate one of the following: ee with the finding. th the finding; in which case f r response shall specify p _ (l) The respondent ag rees wholly or_partially_ we. erson or�ntity_-- lanateon of the reasons there .the res onding p__.... ---- . - 2 The respondent disag _ o each and jury Tecommen__dati°n . "-p O that is disputed and shall include an eo, gr _ of the finding .- b of Sectiort 933 _as __ _ - implemented action. Lir oses of :subdiv..is_n �) action ar regarding the (b) For_p p= _ with a timeframe ' lemented, with a summ y lemented in the future, shall report one of the following reconllnendateoi� has_ bs en imp lemented, but will be imp The - e of et been=in'p a and parameters of an analysis ecommendation 1►a - n . y- (2) The-r - lanation and the scope hrs sis, with an exp agency o - lementation. the officer or head. of the n T - for imp wires further analy._ agency when applicable. for discussion by of the public ag y µ(3) The__recornnlendation redthe governing body artd a timeframe �far"tlie matter to be prepared y and jury report stud3!, investigated -or reviewed, including ublication of the.gT with an department bei1ig six months from the date of p hall : - _ lemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonab e, ..- timeframe $ -- of exceed _ . _ or personnel matters of a county visor s (4) The-recommendatanwill-nQt be -imp rand jury, addresses budgetary - department head and the board of suppose explanation therefor. or recommendation of the grand the agency or (c) _ However, i£ n:finding headed by'aielected officer.;-. The response of the elected agency artme but the response of the board of supeTvisors shall address Only or authority .agency or dep nested bX the -.grand lury., - - his or her agen Y .. shall respond; ►f req... - - el matter_.s over.- it hassorne deciseon ma mg or peTSOnn ects .of the findings or recommendations affecting dgetary u ose of reading and or depa_rtmenthead _sha11.address allasp le and jury for the p rP the accuracy of - - to come before erson or entity in order to verify - - department. e uest:a�ubleetpeI onor.entity A grandturYmay q ranJury-report that relates to that p regard the investigation, (d) the findings Qf il�e_g - mes h� discussingV: --- subject of that investigation re rand jury, det im findings prior to their release shall meet with the subj e' � t ` - - rand -jury west of the foreperson of the g - the g _ on red e : During an investigation, rand jury report relating to that per . .-. - either omits own determination.or u enc; unless the.coart, ortion of the g - _ - co of the pjudge No o officer, a such a meeftng Would be detrimental. agency a py royal of the presiding ' ublic rele - to p - - - the rovtde to the affecte tag- contents of the report prior p, grand]ury shall Pub' release and after the app ( days rior-to its p enc shall disclose any o v orking .._ y _ p entity body of a public ag y a, �Ytment. or govern. ng ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST • SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 • 714/834-3320 June 2, 2023 www.ocgrandjury.org • FAX 714/834-5555 Valerie Amezcua, Mayor VA City of Santa Ana 4 20 Civic Center Plaza T a a Santa Ana, CA 92702 C 0 N Dear Mayor Amezcua: Enclosed is a copy of the 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury report, Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice, "The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange". Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05(f), a copy of the report is being provided to you at least two working days prior to its public release. Please note that under that subsection, "No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report." (Emphasis added.) It is requested that you provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations of this report directed to your office in compliance with Penal Code 933.05(a) and (b), copy is enclosed. Please distribute this report to your governing body. For each Grand Jury recommendation accepted and not implemented, provide a schedule for future implementation. In addition, by the end of March of each subsequent year, please report on the progress being made on each recommendation accepted but not completed. These annual reports should continue until all recommendations are implemented. Please mail the response to the recommendations to Maria Hernandez, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701, with a separate copy mailed to the Orange County Grand Jury, 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701, no later than 90 days after the public release date, June 7, 2023, in compliance with Penal Code 933, copy enclosed. The due date then is September 1, 2023. Should additional time for responding to this report be necessary for further analysis, Penal Code 933.05(b)(3) permits an extension of time up to six months -from-the public release date. Such extensions should be advised in writing, with the information required in Penal Code 933.05(b)(3), to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with a separate copy of the request to the Grand Jury. We tentatively plan to issue the public release on June 7, 2023. Upon public release, the report will be available on the Grand Jury website at www.oc rg andjuU.orF,. agst, r oreperson ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY JVS.jm Enclosures: Grand Jury Report Penal Code 933, 933.05 Cc: Kristine Ridge, City Manager ML Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice 14 TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS """"""'"""""""""" 2 TABLE OF .......................... TABLE OF FIGURES AND TABLES •.•••..••.......""""""' 3 SUMMARY...................... ..............................................................................I................. 4 BACKGROUND .......................................... """.......... 5 REASON.FOR STUDY.................................................................................................... 8 -METHOD-OF STUDY. ...................................................................................................... 8 - Interviews....................................................................................................9 Su rveys........................................................................................................................ 9 SiteVisits................................................................................ KeyDocuments........................................................................................................... 9 Documents Requested but Not Provided................................................................... 10 INVESTIGATIONAND ANALYSIS......................................................................I......... 10 Services and Facilities ......................... ................ 10 __-Volunteer-and Rescue -Relations """....................... 12 13 HumanResources..................................................................................................... Animal Care Attendants ...................... ............................... 14 Communication.......................................................................................................... 16 Policies and Procedures ........................ .......................... 16 - - - COVID-19 .................................. 17 - -- FacilitatingAdoption................................................................................................... 18 - .....-Spay and NeuterOverview......................................................... ..............................19 - - Trap; Neuter and Return ......................... 20 EuthanasiaReport ............................. .............................................................. 22 As_iomar_Reports_..................................................................................................22 --- Analysis_of .00AC .Data.............................................................................................. 2 Dog Euthanasia: ........................................................................................................ 25 - . _Impediments -to -the -Investigation ............ """' 27 -. CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................. 3 -FINDINGS........................................................................................................ ......... 31 3 Management: ............................... .............................................................................. Animal -Welfare .............................. 31 Communication/ Outreach........................................................................................ 32 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 2 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Impediments to the Investigation............................................................................... 32 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................. 33 Management: ............................ ................................................................................ 33 Welfare...................................................................................................................... 33 Communication / Outreach........................................................................................ 34 -- -- Impediments to the-Investigation............................................................................... 35 REQUIRED RESPONSES............................................................................................36 Findings — 90-day Response Required .................................. .-Recommendations -90-day. Response Required.....................................................38 REQUESTEDRESPONSEs......................................................................................... 39 Findings — 90-Day Response Requested ................... ................. .............................. 39 -- Recommendations - 90-Day Response Requested .................................................. 39 -- -REFERENCES..............................................................................................................40 --- - - APPENDIX 1....._....._.....................................................................................................42 Table 1 - Adult Cat Euthanasia and TNR Rates by Quarter ...................................... 42 APPENDIX2................................................................................................................. 43 Table 3 - Dog Behavioral Euthanasia Rates by Quarter ............................................ 43 APPENDIX3................................................................................................................. 44 Orange County_Grand_Jury Animal Shelter Contract City Survey .............................. 44 APPENDIX4..............................:................................................................................... 45 - Orange County Grand -Jury Independent City Shelter Survey ................................... 45 Appendix5.................................................................................................................... 46 OCAC_4t" Quarter 2022 Asilomar Report................................................................... 46 ---AB.BREVIATIONS.:.............. ........:'.................................................................................. 47 -- - - - - GLOSSARY: ......... ...... .-..V._.T................................................................................................ 48 DISCLAIMER............................................................................................................... 51 TABLE OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figure 1 - Map of Orange County.................................................................................... 7 __-_Figure_2 _Adult Cat Euthanasia. Rates ..........................................................................24 -_-.._-___Fig.ure_3 - Dog._Euthanasia_Rates_(Behavioral)..............................................................26 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 3 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice SUMMARY Orange County Animal Care has been a source of public concern since the 1990s, with no less than five previous Orange County Grand Jury reports detailing troubling conditions. The previous reports cited excessive euthanasia rates, poor leadership, inadequate numbers of animal care attendants, a lack of cooperation between staff departments, the exclusion of kennel staff from euthanasia decisions, the lack of proper assessment of animals chosen for euthanasia, and low morale negatively impacting operation of the shelter. Recent public outcry citing conditions at the shelter, recent litigation, and publicly circulated petitions calling for changes at the shelter suggest the previously expressed concerns remain. In addition to these publicly voiced concerns, the current Orange County Grand Jury received direct complaints requesting an inquiry. The Grand Jury - - determined a renewed investigation was warranted. The investigation focused on three major areas of concern: the management of the shelter, the welfare of animals under shelter care, and the communication and engagement with the public and the animal rescue community. A particular concern of the Grand Jury was the shelter's termination of its Trap, Neuter, and Return (TNR) program for community cats. In early 2020, the shelter decided to stop its TNR program. The Grand Jury's investigation determined that termination of the TNR program had detrimental consequences for the welfare of the animals under the shelter's care. The elimination of the TNR program also has contributed to substantial public -__ - dissatisfaction and alienation that undermines the public's and the rescue community's relations with shelter leadership. During the Grand Jury's investigation, it was reported by the shelter's senior management that the termination of the TNR program resulted from an opinion rendered by the County's legal counsel. Understanding the reason leading to the decision to terminate the TNR program would be important for considering whether the - --- program can and/or should be reinstated. Toward that end, the Grand Jury endeavored - to obtain a copy ofthe opinion of the County's legal counsel by directing a written — - - request to the Chair of the Orange County Board of Supervisors. While the Grand Jury recognizes that the opinion may enjoy confidentiality pursuant to the attorney -client privilege, the Board of Supervisors has the discretion to waive that privilege. The Grand - Jury's request-included.its commitment to maintain the confidentiality of the opinion itself and its contents. Nevertheless, the request was declined, as was the Grand Jury's alternative request that the County simply identify the legal authority reviewed in studying the issue. - - - Members of shelter management indicated their understanding the TNR program was terminated due to the opinion that the program violates a state law. The law makes it a crime to willfully abandon an animal notwithstanding that the program was designed to ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 4 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice return cats to their original location rather than releasing them to randomly selected sites. TNR programs are widespread throughout California, not to mention the nation as set forth in a report from the American Bar Association. The Grand Jury is unaware of any published court case determining that a bona fide TNR program is prohibited under the anti -abandonment statute. Given the important benefits to animals and the public provided by such programs, the Grand Jury believes it would be prudent for the County to revisit the propriety of the former program and consider obtaining a second legal opinion. This report highlights analysis of data provided to the Grand Jury by the shelter indicating that euthanasia rates related to dog behavior and to cats have increased significantly within the last two years. The increase in dog behavioral euthanasia rates suggests that there is inconsistency over time as to how dogs are being assessed and evaluated for behavior -related euthanasia. The increase in feline euthanasia rates appears to be correlated with elimination of the TNR program. This report also addresses the challenges in maintaining quality staff at the shelter, especially in the Animal Care Attendant positions. Hiring practices for the shelter are too cumbersome, lengthy and lack consideration of how those practices impact animal welfare. Animal Care Attendant staffing at the shelter is inadequate and Animal Care Attendant staffing vacancies need to be filled more quickly. This report discusses major deficiencies with each of the issues identified above and makes specific recommendations to help support a more engaged community. Status quo at the shelter is unacceptable. Appropriate remedial steps must be taken as animal welfare is paramount! Finally, this report comments on the difficulties the Grand Jury encountered during its investigation. Without explanation, the entirety of the Orange County County Counsel's office determined itself to be conflicted with the Grand Jury's inquiry into Orange County Animal Care. The investigation was hampered and slowed during the six weeks the Grand Jury was required to arrange for outside legal counsel. BACKGROUND Orange County Animal Care (OCAC) began operations in 1941 and was responsible for rabies and tending to lost livestock. In 1950, the population of Orange County was roughly 216,000. By January 2022, the estimated population was 3.1 million people. OCAC provides a myriad of services over a wide territory and variety of client needs -and expectations. OCAC serves the unincorporated areas of Orange County and --contracts its services to _1.4 client cities: Anaheim, Brea, Cypress, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Huntington Beach, Lake Forest, Orange, Placentia, San Juan Capistrano, - Santa Ana, Tustin, Villa Park, and Yorba Linda. The remaining cities in Orange County either have their own shelter or contract with other cities or non-profit groups to provide animal care and control services. The unincorporated areas of the county and the 14 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 6 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice contract cities have a combined population of approximately 1.8 million residents, greater than half of the total population of Orange County. In March 2018, a new shelter was opened on a 10-acre site at a cost of $35 million. The shelter includes a two-story, approximately 30,000 square -foot main building, six stand- alone kennel buildings, multiple dog play yards, a barnyard, and a rabbit housing area. OCAC can shelter up to 600 animals and is the single largest municipal animal facility in the western United States serving residents in one location. OCAC has 137 authorized staff positions. Approximately 21 staff are animal care attendants who are represented by the Teamsters Union. All other staff are represented by the Orange County Employees Association. Labor relations and contract terms must be taken into consideration while operating the shelter. OCAC, like most municipal shelters, relies upon a variety of rescue support groups and citizen volunteers to enhance animal welfare and outcomes. The relationship between shelter management, rescue groups, and volunteers has deteriorated in the last three years.- The historical partnership between the shelter and rescue groups has become stressed due to a variety of reasons. The breakdown in communication, engagement, and trust between parties has negatively affected shelter operations. Most large municipal shelters are "kill' shelters, which are shelters where animals may be euthanized for any of a variety of reasons. Privately operated shelters and smaller municipal shelters tend to be non -kill shelters. Non -kill shelters may euthanize some animals in special cases, but generally do not euthanize animals. Large municipal shelters, owing to their size, capacity, public responsibility, operational mandates, and their positioning as "shelters of last resort," euthanize animals as a matter of course. Animals are euthanized for a variety of reasons, such as: • they suffer from irredeemable disease or injury, -they are of a species that represent a danger to the community, or • they are behaviorally unfit for adoption. Many shelters have Trap, Neuter and. Return (TNR) programs. In accordance with these programs, feral and community cats are captured from their outdoor environment, taken to a shelter or veterinarian where they are neutered, and then returned to the location from where they were trapped. TNR programs serve to reduce colonies of feral and community cats in a humane manner and serve to manage and reduce this cat population. OCAC had a TNR program beginning in 2013 until early 2020 when it was discontinued. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 6 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Figure I - Map of Orange County Cities Contracted with Orange County Animal Care - -The map -above shows the cities and unincorporated areas currently contracted with OCAG.-All_city-corntracts are not alike in that OCAC may provide partial services for some cities and full services for others. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 20221 2023 PAGE 7 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice REASON FOR STUDY In 2022, the Grand Jury received 14 complaints about the Orange County Animal Care (OCAC) shelter. Many of those complaints were the same complaints addressed in five previous Grand Jury reports, including: • the shelter's unresponsiveness to community needs, • restricted public access to the shelter's kennels, • restricted opportunities to walk through the kennels and engage with adoptable animals, and • concerns related to inadequate staffing and volunteer levels. Complainants also expressed concerns about animal surrenders, a perceived increase in homeless cats with less spay/neuter availability, and the shelter's increased euthanasia rates. About the same time the Grand Jury was receiving public complaints about the shelter, a petition with thousands of signatures was delivered to the Orange County Board of Supervisors. The petition addressed the same concerns as the complaints received by the Grand Jury and demanded change in the shelter's appointment -only system and reinstatement of the shelter's TNR program. The Grand Jury also learned about a lawsuit filed by Elizabeth Hueg, Safe Rescue Team (a California 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation), and Cats In Need Of Human Care (another California 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation) seeking an injunction from the Orange County Superior Court for the assignment of a shelter monitor to oversee shelter operations. The 2022-2023 Grand Jury revisited OCAC because public discussion pointed to new and allegedly ongoing and unresolved concerns about shelter operations. The Grand Jury focused on current practices at OCAC to determine how well the needs of the animals, staff, and public are being met. METHOD OF STUDY The Orange County Grand Jury's objective is to provide an accurate portrayal of OCAC's current operations, culture, inner workings, and challenges. The Grand Jury investigation relied on interviews, public and shelter documents, surveys, site visits, and news accounts about the shelter. The information supporting the facts, findings, and recommendations in this report is corroborated, validated, and verified through multiple sources. Interviews The interviews conducted by the Grand Jury focused on an in-depth review of OCAC management, staffing, operating structure, animal care procedures, communications, animal care statistics, operating plan, organization structure, morale, the volunteer ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 8 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice program, relationship with rescue organizations, and complaints. Interviews included the following: • Management and staff from OCAC. • Current and former volunteers from OCAC. • Management from the OC Community Resources (OCCR) office. • Management from the Orange County Centralized Human Resources and OCCR Human Resources offices. • Community complainants from Orange County Grand Jury Public Concern Letters. • Retained outside legal counsel. • Leaders of Orange County city -managed shelters. • Animal advocates. Surveys The Grand Jury solicited feedback from the shelter's clients by surveying the 14 cities contracted with OCAC to provide animal care and control services. Questions in the survey were crafted to determine city satisfaction with the services provided and cost effectiveness and to solicit any concerns city leaders, managers, and residents may have with OCAC. (Appendix 3) A second.survey was directed to the five independent city -managed animal shelters in Orange County, soliciting information about their shelter operations, staffing, animal population, adoption procedures, and other challenges. (Appendix 4) Site Visits The Grand Jury conducted tours and site visits to the OCAC shelter: • One visit was a guided tour of the facility, during which the Grand Jury was provided behind -the -scenes access to observe conditions and observe shelter staff as they went about their daily routines. • A second visit was an anonymous visit by two members of the Grand Jury. The - --- two members -visited the shelter to experience, firsthand, guest services and the appointment process for adopting an animal. -= A --third visit was an unscheduled visit to observe kennel cleaning and to gather additional documents and records. The Grand Jury also toured the City of Irvine Animal Shelter and the Mission Viejo Animal Services Center. Key Documents • Documents and information provided by OCAC: o Policy and Procedure Manual governing the Orange County Animal Shelter o Volunteer Program Manual ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 9 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice o Total number of volunteers who have served by year since 2018 o Organization Charts o Job Descriptions of all authorized and contracted positions o Statistics on animals under OCAC care, including adoptions o The OCAC Monthly and Quarterly National Shelter Statistics Project Data Matrix (2018-2022) o OCAC euthanasia records o OCAC Asilomar Reports • OCGJ cat and dog euthanasia statistical analysis derived from OCAC euthanasia records and OCAC Asilomar Reports • City Run Shelters and Contracted City survey responses and summaries • Reports from city -managed shelters • OCGJ Public Concern Letters • .Legal briefs filed in the lawsuit against OCAC (Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2022-01282419-CU-WM-CJC) • Reports from five former OC Grand Juries: 1999-2000, 2003-2004, 2007-2008, and 2014-2015 (2 reports in 2014-2015) • OCAC Performance Audit responses (February 4, 2016) • American Bar Association legal opinion 102B, Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section report to House of Delegates - Resolution No. 29N, pages 1 and 2 • California Penal Code Section 597s • OCAC Strategic Plan Executive Summary (January 22, 2018) - Strategic Priority, pages 1 to 4 • Association of Shelter Veterinarians Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters Documents Requested but Not Provided • Daily census of all animals plus breakdown of number of cats and dogs from 2018 through 2022 (not provided by OCAC since it reportedly is not tracked). • Complaints and Grievance log. The Grand Jury attempted, without success, to obtain a copy of OC County Counsel's opinion concerning the terminated TNR program. The Grand Jury's request to the Chair of the Orange County Board of Supervisors for a copy of the opinion was denied, as was an alternative request that the County simply identify the legal authority reviewed in studying the issue. INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS Services and Facilities The Orange County Animal Care (OCAC) shelter is the largest municipal shelter in the western United States serving residents in one location. The nature, size, and scope of the shelter adds complexity and unique challenges to its operation. The shelter employs 137 staff engaged in a variety of functions including animal sheltering and care, animal control, reuniting lost pets with their owners, veterinary services, licensing, adoption, marketing, public relations, and administration. Supporting the varied needs of over 1.8 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 10 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice million residents requires a substantial investment in facilities, infrastructure, personnel, organization, customer service, and public outreach. OCAC provides temporary shelter and medical care for "lost" owned or stray animals and opportunities for adoption of these animals. OCAC houses and provides medical care for impounded dogs, cats, and exotic animals. OCAC also provides animal control services that include removing dangerous non -domesticated animals where they pose a hazard to humans or other animals. OCAC is not a No -Kill shelter. OCAC euthanizes animals for several different and sometimes compelling reasons, including animals injured beyond redemptive medical care, behavior, species and breed, and age. The size and complexity of the shelter leads to numerous managerial and operational challenges. The shelter has space capacity to care for up to 600 animals; however, at times, the number of animals at the shelter exceeds shelter capacity. When capacity is - exceeded, temporary capacity -is created by moving cat cages into administrative areas such as the facility's training and conference room. On the day the Grand Jury toured the shelter, there were 450 animals. The Grand Jury was unable to obtain a full accounting of the average number of animals per day at the facility since OCAC only began keeping daily animal census records in December 2022. However, the Grand Jury was able to estimate average daily cat and dog count from the shelter's Asilomar reports. Average daily cat and dog count based on quarterly Asilomar data for the years 2021 and 2022 was between 350 and 400 cats and dogs. Actual daily counts will vary from the average and counts vary with the seasons. The Grand Jury surveyed the cities being served by OCAC. Most cities expressed satisfaction with the services provided by the shelter. During interviews with the Grand Jury, shelter management voiced the challenge of expanding and enhancing services versus the Willingness of contract cities to pay for additional services. Shelter management expressed the need to balance services with the cost consciousness of their contract cities and the county budget, while also providing a level of service expected by the public. Shelter management expressed awareness that contract cities have alternative service options if the prices charged by OCAC for its service are beyond city expectations or budget. - From 1995 through 2016, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) collected and published data from California's animal shelters. Currently, CDPH does not keep or compile comprehensive data on animal shelters operating within the State. Out of concern for crowding and high euthanasia rates, animal welfare groups within the State have pressed for legislative action in Sacramento. In January of 2023, Assembly Bill 332, _- - called the "Shelter Animal Collection Data Act," was introduced by Assemblyman Alex _-_Lee -(D-San-Jose) and coauthored by Assemblywoman Marie Waldron (R-Valley Center). - -Assembly Bill 332, if adopted, would require shelter data collection and reporting that - - - piggybacks onto current rabies reporting mandates. The bill would further require CDPH to collect and publish animal shelter intake and outcome data, including adoption, redemption, euthanasia, and other categories. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 11 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice a Volunteer and Rescue Relations Most animal shelters rely on a host of shelter volunteers to help with the care and enrichment of the animals under supervision, and they also rely on private rescue organizations (rescues) to help with the adoption process and fostering. OCAC is no exception. Shelter volunteers help by assisting shelter staff with animal care, socialization, and enrichment; community outreach and events; conducting tours; greeting shelter visitors; and assisting with shelter adoptions. Volunteers are often the ones who walk the dogs, work with their socialization, and foster kittens without mothers. The volunteer program is vital. Rescue organizations help by accepting animals from the shelter and facilitating adoptions or placing animals in foster care for eventual adoption. Rescues help relieve the shelter of overcrowding. These organizations benefit animals by facilitating adoptions or placing them in -foster homes with enriched social environments greater than the shelter can reasonably provide. The coordinated efforts of shelter staff, volunteers, and rescue organizations are vital to OCAC's success and the welfare of animals under its care. OCAC has been challenged by both inadequate staffing and strained collaboration between the shelter, volunteers, and rescues; Some challenges are the result of the recent COVID-19 crisis, when the volunteer program was shut down in response to County health mandates. Other challenges are due to some rescue organizations' responses to changes in shelter organization, operation; and procedures within the last 2 to 3 years. Moreover, some organizations report recent funding challenges that limit their ability to fully assist the shelter with its animal welfare mandate. Funding has been especially challenging for. rescues since COVID-19. The shelter's volunteer program was not restarted until late 2022, although state COVID- 19 restrictions were lifted June 15, 2021. Unfortunately, restarting the program required - - more than calling all volunteers back from COVID-19 isolation. Some former volunteers have not returned because they have moved on with their lives. Some volunteers have -- not returned because of their dissatisfaction with recent changes in organization, operation, and procedures at the shelter. However, some volunteers have returned, and ----- - more are being recruited to form the foundation for a re -energized volunteer program. -Relationships between the shelter and some rescues remain strained. Leadership changes within the past three years, changes in circumstances at the shelter, and the shelter's response to COVID-19 resulted in changes to shelter priorities and practices to which some rescues object. Some changes were precipitated by differences in priorities and concerns that came with the change in shelter leadership, some changes were in response to COVID-19 restrictions and concerns, and one change came as the result of the shelter's response to a threat of litigation by a lone animal activist from outside Orange County challenging the shelter's TNR program. Strained relations between OCAC and rescue organizations are detrimental to the operations of the shelter and ultimately to the welfare of animals under the shelter's care. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 12 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice To operate at its highest potential, OCAC needs to have a good working relationship with the rescues. Rescues want to have a good working relationship with OCAC. During Grand Jury interviews, both management at OCAC and representatives of rescues indicated a desire to work to resolve their differences, and both expressed the welfare of the animals as being their highest priority. OCAC will benefit if it has a robust outreach program to continually recruit volunteers and will benefit by engaging with the rescue community to mend the fractured relationship that has developed between them. Human Resources _The _OCAC shelter is a 24/7 facility that requires adequate staffing during all hours to meet the highest standards of animal welfare. Continuity of leadership at the OCAC shelter has been a challenge over the past four - - years with turnover in management and supervisorial staff level positions. Over the past four years, two executive directors have been hired with interim leadership having to be provided on two separate occasions. The Chief Veterinary position went unfilled for months until the current Chief Veterinarian was brought onboard in May 2022. Between September 2021 and May 2022, the shelter did not have a chief or a staff veterinarian and services were provided by one contract veterinarian. OCAC is under the direction of-OC Community Resources (OCCR). However, day -to - ..day human resource and recruitment support for the shelter is performed by OC Human Resource Services (OCHRS). OCHRS provides separate, targeted human resource support for OCAC's recruitment, labor relations, and employee relations needs. Personnel turnover in critical job categories, such as kennel attendants, can add huge pressure to the remaining staff. Vacancies in critical positions strain shelter operations and impact animal welfare. There are currently 21 allocated Animal Care Attendant positions out of the 136 shelter staff positions. The 21 animal care attendants are assigned to fill the shelter's attendant needs over the 7-day shelter week. There is -- - reason for concern and urgency when even one Animal Care Attendant position goes unfilled. and practices exacerbate high turnover and make filling vacant positions --------- difficult. Current county practice allows an employee to promote out of their shelter - - - position, or any position, at any time, even while they are still within their probationary period. The ease and fluidity of transitioning adds to the shelter's understaffing and staffing volatility. -_-Staff vacancies, which have been as high as 23%, negatively impact shelter operations - and have taken as long as six months or longer to fill. Delays in filling staff positions - =--- - -disrupt shelter operations. Delays have resulted in qualified candidates declining job offers because they have accepted other positions. Animal Care Attendant and Veterinarian positions are particularly critical and vital to the welfare of the shelter's animals. While OCCR has taken some steps to correct hiring delays, there needs to be an increased sense of urgency when posting and filling critical vacant positions. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 13 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice As a unionized organization, limitations exist which impact the assignment of human resources within the shelter's organization and daily operations. Staff are siloed into operational categories and job functions, which limits managerial flexibility in their ability to respond to special operational needs. An inflexibility in management's ability to respond to vacancies in Animal Care Attendant staffing is one such example. Staffing limitations and operational inflexibility has resulted in instances of inefficient allocation of shelter human resources. Moreover, labor rules limit shelter volunteers from performing certain duties that must be performed by shelter employees. Volunteers are drawn to the shelter out of a desire to work and care for the animals. Restricting volunteers from lending a hand when they see the need is disheartening to the volunteers. Animal Care Attendants Animal care attendants at OCAC provide the direct, daily care of the animals. They attend to several areas of responsibilities: • Intaking animals brought to the shelter by the public or impounded by animal control or the cities, entering information about the animal into the shelter's data base, and taking pictures of the animals. • Feeding and watering of all the shelter's animals — domestic, exotic, and wild. • Cleaning and disinfecting kennels, cages, corrals, and equipment and maintaining the general cleanliness of the shelter's kennel facilities. • Monitoring, documenting, and reporting on the health and well-being of sick, exotic, and quarantined animals; reporting any abnormalities or changes in condition to veterinary staff. • Assisting with animal adoptions, including providing counseling on breed characteristics, matching and introducing the appropriate animal to the potential adopter, and instructing adopters in basic animal care. • Grooming the animals for the health and comfort of the animals. • Responding to public inquiries about legal retention, adoption procedures, basic animal care, and behavior. Animal Care Attendants may be assigned into any one of three areas of responsibility: Intake, Cat Team, or Dog Team. Usually, Intake has two Animal Care Attendants assigned to -it; they -may -receive 30 to 60 animals per day. The Cat Team is responsible - - for the kennel areas -housing cats, kittens, rabbits, guinea pigs and other animals. Their duties include cleaning and feeding, enrichment, adoption and the other activities discussed above. The Dog Team is responsible for the kennel areas housing dogs. Their duties include cleaning and feeding, enrichment, adoption and the other activities noted above. _ In 2016, OCAC brought in professional consultants to provide recommendations for a --2018 Strategic Plan. One of the consultant's recommendations was for the shelter to increase staffing allocation to 26 Animal Care Attendant positions. OCAC did not implement that recommendation. Additionally, the consultant recommended the shelter follow the Association of Shelter Veterinarians (ASV) Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters. Those practices include National Animal Control Association (NACA) ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 14 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice guidelines and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) guidelines (which is the current standard). The allocation of Animal Care Attendants at OCAC is insufficient for the shelter to meet industry standards for level of care. NACA and HSUS recommend a minimum of 15 minutes of care per day per animal for feeding and cleaning each animal housed in the shelter; 9 minutes for cleaning and 6 minutes for feeding and watering. There are currently 21 Animal Care Attendant positions allocated at the shelter. Three positions were vacant as of May 1, 2023. A normal Animal Care Attendant daily shift at the shelter is 10 hours, of which the attendants are expected to spend half their time cleaning, feeding, and watering the animals and half their time attending to other - responsibilities, including those responsibilities noted above. Half the Animal Care Attendants work from Wednesday through Saturday and the others work Sunday through Wednesday. Animal Care Attendants spend about 4'/2 hours cleaning and feeding the animals each day. The Grand Jury evaluated the Animal Care Attendant's workload during the four -month period between December 4, 2022 and April 10, 2023. Individual Animal Care Attendants cared for 48 animals per shift on average and in some cases up to 90 animals per shift. Conservatively, Animal Care Attendants at the shelter spend less than 6 minutes on average per animal attending to cleaning and feeding, which is much less than the 15 minutes recommended by the NACA and HSUS guidelines. Of note, the four -month period reviewed by the Grand Jury is not the shelter's busy season. During kitten season, the cats and kittens alone can number up to 500 to 600 cats and kittens. per day. -The Grand Jury could not evaluate daily census records prior to December 4, 2022 because OCAC did not keep daily animal census records prior to that date. There are still other needs the animals have, such as time for animal enrichment which is required daily. The other half of the Animal Attendant's shift is devoted to picking up animals from intake, showing animals for potential adoptions, walking dogs, stocking supplies, washing dishes or other non -direct animal care tasks. - - --ASV-Guidelines stress enrichment should be given the same significance as feeding, _watering, and veterinary care. Successful enrichment programs prevent the development - and display of abnormal behavior and provide for the well-being of the animal. Regular positive daily social interaction with humans is essential for both dogs and cats. Animals need daily walking, playing, grooming, petting, etc. OCAC's 2018 Strategic Plan called _ for all sheltered dogs and cats to receive appropriate daily enrichment tailored to their needs. The Grand Jury found that other shelters in Orange County walk their dogs _ several times per day and provide numerous opportunities for enrichment. At the OCAC shelter,.dogs -are -not always _walked daily. Instead, animal care attendants only walk dogs every other day, as time permits. The Grand Jury recognizes that resources are limited, but the shelter must prioritize the welfare of the animals over other shelter operation considerations. This puts pressure on management to operate the shelter efficiently. Other animal care facilities report 50% of ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 . PAGE 15 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice their staff provide direct care to their animals. At OCAC, only 15% of staff provide direct care. The Grand Jury recommends a review of the current allocation of positions within OCAC. OCAC has 137 budgeted staff positions of which only 21 positions provide direct care to the animals. Assigning adequate resources to the direct care of the animals must be a priority as the health and welfare of the animals is the shelter's primary charge. The current allocation of Animal Care Attendant positions is insufficient. Communication The shelter's organizational challenges are numerous; many challenges are systemic, but some are self-inflicted. With many constituents, such as shelter staff, volunteers, rescue organizations, and the public at large, robust communication programs are essential to addressing the concerns and needs of both internal and external audiences. -Collaboration and communication within the shelter are lacking. Departments within the shelter are siloed. Staff within departments focus solely on their duties and responsibilities -and are not encouraged to think of their efforts as being part of a "Big Picture." Morale is reported to be low. Workplace rules and position classifications tend to discourage a collaborative mindset. In March 2015, the Orange County Office of the Performance Director issued a report on the OCAC. The OC Auditor noted that, among other things, the shelter was not holding regular "all -hands" staff meetings. The Auditor recommended that the shelter hold meetings at least every quarter. The 2014/2015 Orange County Grand Jury report of the OCAC made the same recommendation. The response from OCAC to this Grand Jury report was that all -hands meetings were implemented. However, all -hands meetings currently do not occur at any regularly scheduled interval. Although shelter staff have a general sense of shelter operations and functions, the shelter is a siloed work environment. Without regularly scheduled all -hands meetings, staff have little opportunity to hear and be heard by shelter leadership and for management to communicate a consistent message. -Shelter-volunteers are limited to a program that effectively segregates them from shelter staff and management. Volunteers have little to no voice or effective input into the shelter's decision hierarchy. Policies and Procedures The Grand Jury found. that the shelter's Policies and Procedures manual does not undergo regular internal review. There are policies and procedures in the manual that do not reflect current shelter practices. Additionally, there are important shelter practices and functions that are not addressed or are inadequately documented within the manual. There are some policies and procedures in the manual addressing programs that are no longer relevant or --where the manual describes practices that are outdated. It is evident some policies and procedures in the manual have from time to time been inserted or revised, but those cases appear to be done on an ad -hoc basis and are not methodical. Individual policies and procedures documented in the manual are annotated with the date they became effective and, when applicable, revised. However, there is nothing to ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 16 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice indicate when or if a policy or procedure has been contemporarily reviewed and determined to be relevant, accurate, and applicable. Some policies and procedures in the manual were written as long ago as the late 1970s with revisions in the mid-2000s. There is no indication that any particular policy or procedure has been reviewed as current and appropriate, or by whom, or when. Operating a shelter without up-to-date, reliable policies, procedures, and guidelines make formal training difficult, if not impossible, and results in inconsistent operating protocols and practices. More importantly, when new staff are hired, training becomes "on the job training" and subject to inconsistency. With the high level of turnover at the shelter, it is all the more important to ensure policies and procedures are up to date. COVID-19 The impacts of COVID-19 on shelter operations should not go unacknowledged. Shelter operations were severely strained as state and county COVID-19 restrictions were put into place. The shelter was effectively closed to the public. Emergency protocols and practices were put into place to ensure the safety of the public and OCAC staff. Leadership had to manage a 24-hour shelter, with many members of the staff required to work on site. Work shifts and resources had to be juggled to ensure staffing was sufficient and personnel were kept safe. Within the limits of the shelter's staffing allocation, management created a Team A/Team B system that isolated one half of the staff from the other half of the staff. Staff came into work only during those days and hours their assigned team was scheduled. Extraordinary sanitation protocols were put into place. Nevertheless, when COVID-19 illnesses did occur, management and staff rose to the occasion, working flexibly and cooperatively to prioritize the care of the animals. Both shelter leadership and staff are to be commended for managing shelter operations through a difficult time. Unfortunately, the volunteer program was suspended during COVID-19 restrictions and engagement with rescues was significantly impacted. The volunteer program was slow to be restarted. Shelter management could and should have anticipated the end of COVID- 19 restrictions and worked toward reinstating the shelter's volunteer program much earlier than late 2022. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 17 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Facilitating Adoption During COVID-19, most animal shelters, including OCAC, closed or restricted their shelters to public access, including stopping all public walk-in visits. Prior to COVID-19, the adoption process at the shelter was relatively open. The public was at liberty to visit the shelter at their convenience without an appointment. The cat and dog kennels were mostly open to public viewing where a potential adopter could experience first-hand the size, look, and manner of a potential adoptee. Volunteers and staff were available to facilitate an intimate meeting where humans and animals could interact and bond. The experience was unconstrained, spontaneous, instinctive, and natural. OCAC previously had an animal behaviorist who worked with stressed animals to facilitate their adoptability. OCAC eliminated the animal behaviorist position. Other -- - animal shelters in Orange County have animal behaviorists working with their animals to facilitate adoptability. During COVID-19, public adoptions were carried out by appointment only and computer facilitated. The public was required to schedule an appointment to visit the shelter. Up to three animals could -be selected on the shelter's website from photographs and biographical information about the animals. A one-on-one meet -up with the animal(s) __. followed. People without computer access could use the shelter's computer kiosk to select an -animal, but by appointment only. If a suitable animal was not found among the animals selected via computer, kennel staff might make recommendations to the potential adopter. Currently, the adoption process is less restrictive than during COVID-19 but remains more restrictive than pre-COVI D-1 9. The current appointment system is restrictive and ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 18 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice does not provide prospective adopters viewing access to all available adoptable animals. The shelter has opened to limited walk-ins on a stand-by basis when there are openings in the appointment schedule and when staff are available to assist. All potential adopters, appointments, and walk-ins are still required to use the shelter's website to pre -select potential adoptees prior to a one-on-one meeting. The kennels are still off-limits to all visitors. OCAC leadership expressed concern about bites to visitors as the primary reason for restricting kennel access. The shelter experienced a marked drop in bites coincidental with the closure of the facility to the public when COVID-19 restrictions were implemented: • 2019 — 23 bites • 2020 — 7 bites • 2021 — 3 bites • 2022 — 2 bites (as of December 23) However, not all dogs are bite risks and there is space throughout the kennel facilities to provide for public viewing. Public safety is important, however, dogs representing bite risks can be segregated, and supervised viewing is a viable option. Shelter leadership said that public viewing within the kennels stresses the animals and that restricting access keeps the animals calm. However, to address that concern, dogs prone to excitability and stress can be secluded, and supervised viewing is an option. Spay and Neuter Overview As mentioned earlier, the population of Orange County in 1950 was about 216,000. Today the contract cities and unincorporated county areas served by OCAC has a population of approximately 1,800,000. With the population increase comes an increase in the number of dogs, cats, and other pets. Euthanasia of animals at the shelter is a challenging problem confronting OCAC and pet -- - owners. In most cases, members of the public either bring lost animals to the shelter to be reunited with their owners.or bring their own animals to be adopted to new homes. - -Few people -bring animals to the shelter to be euthanized. One reason OCAC has so many animals and a high incidence of euthanasia is that many pet owners do not spay/neuter_their pets and thereby allow them to reproduce beyond the owner's ability to care for the offspring. Uncontrolled reproduction is a factor in the high population of dogs and especially cats. According to a 2011 report by the North Shore Animal League of America, each day over 70,000 puppies and kittens are born in the United States, and because of -== - - overpopulation, more than 3.7- million animals are still being euthanized each year across the country. The absence of TNR at the shelter has seriously increased the rate of euthanasia of cats, especially kittens, who are not old enough or healthy enough to adopt. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 19 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Many communities incentivize sterilization of pet dogs by significantly lowering the cost of dog licenses for sterilized dogs in their city. Generally, community shelters and rescue organizations will only allow spayed/neutered animals for adoption or require the new owner have the animal spayed/neutered as part of the adoption process. Some complaints received by the Grand Jury assert that the public has requested low/no cost spay/neuter assistance from OCAC without success. OCAC does not offer low or no cost spay/neuter clinics or events but does list on its website feral cat low cost spay/neuter resources. However, the Grand Jury found that some of the listed phone numbers are incorrect and for those that are correct, some of the listed prices are - - - incorrect. Providing a low/no cost spay/neuter clinic would provide a great service to the - community, decrease overpopulation of animals, and decrease the potential euthanasia of cats and dogs. Trap, Neuter and Return OCAC began a pilot Trap, Neuter, and Return (TNR) program for cats in 2013 and over - the following years saw cat intake and euthanasia decrease dramatically. TNR has been shown to be the most humane, efficient way of stabilizing feral and community cat populations. TNR is an animal control program practiced by many animal shelters - - throughout the United States and the State of California. Prior to April 2020, the Orange -County-Animal Shelter had an active Trap, Neuter, and Return program. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 20 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice `nA k S�q OCAC's TNR program was a cooperative endeavor that depended and relied on the efforts of participating non-profit rescue organizations and individual members of the community. Both OCAC and community participants worked together to make the TNR program successful. Non -profits and interested members of the animal welfare community performed the field work necessary to trap feral and community cats and transport the cats to the shelter. OCAC received the animals, performed the spay and neuter procedure, vaccinated the animals, and treated them for injuries or disease. When the animals were healthy, fit, and ready for return to their outdoor home, the same non-profit organization or community members retrieved the cats from the shelter and returned them to the same location from which they were trapped. - OCAC only provided TNR related services within its shelter facility and did not participate in -locating., trapping, or returning the animals to the location from where they were trapped. However, OCAC played an integral role in the TNR process. When OCAC's participation in the TNR program ended, TNR within the county effectively ceased. QCAC`s--TNR program was popular among many local animal welfare groups and _ individuals and -is a necessary element to the continuance of a viable TNR program throughout the county. The Grand Jury recognizes there is disagreement among animal control and welfare -:-.: advocates whether TNR is effective in reducing feral and community cat populations, _whether TNR serves the best interest of the individual animal, and whether TNR is an environmentally sound practice. In Orange County at least, there apparently is also -disagreement whether-TNR programs violate a provision of the California Penal Code dealing with malicious mischief. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 21 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice California Penal Code Section 597s states: (a) Every person who willfully abandons any animal is guilty of a misdemeanor. (b) This section shall not apply to the release or rehabilitation and release of native California wildlife pursuant to statute or regulations of the California Department of Fish and Game. As best as the Grand Jury can determine, the validity of California Penal Code Section 597s or its interpretation or application has never been adjudicated in a reported California court decision. According to a report published by the American Bar Association, it is questionable whether a bona fide TNR program, in which animals are returned to the same location where they were trapped, constitutes willful abandonment. In or about late 2019/early 2020, OCAC received a cease -and -desist complaint demanding that it end its participation in the TNR program. OCAC referred the complaint to OC County Counsel: County Counsel reviewed and responded to the referral in an opinion. The Grand Jury went to great lengths to obtain a copy of County Counsel's opinion, to no avail. The Grand Jury requested a copy of the opinion from OCAC, the County Counsel, the Orange County Board of Supervisors, and Orange County Public Resources. As of the publication of this report, the Grand Jury was not able to acquire a copy of County Counsel's opinion. The Grand Jury was informed that OCCR and OCAC management were advised they could be held personally liable for any legal action arising out of continuance of the TNR program. OCAC's TNR program was terminated in or about April 2020. Euthanasia Report OCAC keeps detailed records of each animal it euthanizes. The Grand Jury reviewed a comprehensive list of all euthanasia outcomes at the shelter spanning the period August 19, 2018 through December 4, 2022. The shelter euthanized 11,143 animals during that period. Of the euthanized animals, 5,123 were identified as either domestic cats or dogs. (Feral cats are classified as domestic animals.) The remaining 6,020 euthanized animals included other domestic and/or non -domesticated animals. OCAC's records identify every euthanized animal's date of euthanasia, estimated age, sex, species, breed, and the reason for euthanasia. Estimated animal ages span one day-to-50 years. Species span domestic cats and dogs to domestic and/or non - domesticated animals such as snakes, birds, opossums, bats, rabbits, raccoons, skunks, lizards, rats, squirrels, coyotes, deer, and more. Reasons for euthanasia are varied and include irredeemable suffering, Head Test (rabies), disease, behavior, age, species (public safety), and owner request. Asilomar Reports In 2004, leaders representing national organizations and industry stakeholders gathered to find common ground in the animal welfare field. Together, they wrote the Asilomar Accords, which establishes common definitions and a standardized way of reporting shelter statistics. Asilomar reports are statistical reports that animal shelters compile documenting their animal intakes and outcomes. The reports are aggregated into a national Shelter Animals Count National Database. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 22 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice OCAC compiles records and participates according to the Asilomar Accords data collection methods. The shelter publishes its Asilomar reports on its website. OCAC's data includes statistics on monthly (pre-2021) and quarterly (post-2021) cat and dog intake and outcomes such as adoptions, transfers, returns to owner, and euthanasia. Analysis of OCAC Data The Grand Jury reviewed euthanasia and Asilomar outcomes to evaluate whether termination of the TNR program may have had any impact on euthanasia rates at the shelter. Possibly confounding the issue is the fact that COVID-19 restrictions were put into place about the same time the TNR program was terminated. Figure 2 shows quarterly OCAC Asilomar adult cat TNR outcomes and adult cat euthanasia outcomes from the 3rd quarter of 2018 through the end of 2022. TNR rates are represented as a percent of total Asilomar outcomes. Euthanasia rates are represented as a percent of total Asilomar outcomes net of TNR outcomes. Juvenile cats are not included in the review because the shelter's juvenile cat population varies widely with the season and, moreover, juveniles are not candidates for TNR. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 23 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Figure 2 - Adult Cat Euthanasia Rates Adult Cats Euthanized vs. Adult Cats TNR as a % of Total Asilomar Outcomes ..._...._.. . ................. _..... 60% — - _ TNR program terminated Calif. Covid Restrictions End and Calif. Covid Restrictions '---"- 50% Begin a R� Average = 28.8% 40% ccti ss' a� °j ssrs t"$ :. ...::::: ..... ::......:::...............:.. :. ........._... 30% 20% . _ 4 - k °*Adult cats euthanized as a 10% Asilomar outcomes net of TNR Average = 20.9% „ outcomes. 0% Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 -Adult Cats E:uthanized ° 9- TNR Figure 2 illustrates that adult cat euthanasia rates increased at OCAC following the termination of the TNR program and the beginning of COVID-19 restrictions. The average adult cat euthanasia rate in the period from the 3rd quarter of 2018 through the 1st quarter of 2020 (pre-TNR termination and COVID-19 restrictions) was 20.9%. The average adult cat euthanasia rate in the period from the 2nd quarter of 2020 through the -end 'of 2022 (post-TNR and COVID-19) was 28.8%. The increase in the rate of adult cat euthanasia following TNR/COVID-19 is 38% over the previous period. The increase is statistically significant. (See Appendix 1) --- Comparing adultcate t z }anasla rates pre-TNR and p ost-T ' R : h in�ation of the TNR j. program correlate r $ 'g ,crease �n adult cat ��, ._ __ -- euthanaslara ; atthe she ter. To evaluate whether circumstances related to COVID-19 accounted for the increase in _ euthanasia rates, the rates from the post-COVID-19/post-TNR termination were compared to the rates pre-COVID-19/pre-TNR termination. Again, the average adult cat ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 24 OF 61 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice euthanasia rate before COVID-19 and during the TNR program was 20.9%. The average adult cat euthanasia rate after COVID-19 restrictions were lifted but still during the termination of the TNR program (Q3 2021 — Q4 2022) was 25.4%. The increase in the rate of adult cat euthanasia following termination of the TNR program but after COVID- 19 restrictions were lifted is 21 % over the pre-TNR term ination/pre-COVID-19 restrictions rate. Again, the increase is statistically significant. Comparing adult cat euthanasia rates pre-TNR and post-TNR and pre- and post-COVID- 19 restrictions, it appears both COVID-19 restrictions and the termination of the TNR program correlate to an increase in adult cat euthanasia rate at the shelter. Dog Euthanasia: OCAC euthanizes animals fora variety of reasons, including but not limited to injuries beyond redemptive medical care, age, and behavior. When OCAC euthanizes a dog for medical reasons, the Chief Veterinarian or a staff veterinarian must approve the procedure. In the case of behavior -related euthanasia, approval is determined by a five - member Behavior Evaluation Committee. OCAC euthanizes dogs that are determined to have irredeemable behavioral issues, including displays of aggression toward people or other animals, bites, and severe kennel stress. The five members of the Behavior Evaluation Committee include staff members representing Field Operations, Animal Services Operations, the Community Outreach team, the Chief Veterinarian, and a representative from senior management. While there are five staff members represented on the Behavior Evaluation Committee, only three participants are voting members. The Chief Veterinarian and the member from senior management serve only as advisory members. A majority of the three voting members of the committee must approve a behavioral euthanasia — that is, at least two of the three voting members must approve. OCAC's_Behavior Evaluation. Committee evaluates dogs for euthanasia without written guidelines, policies, or procedures, resulting in inconsistent outcomes over time. Behavior -evaluated euthanasia outcomes are dependent on the experience and personal considerations of the individual committee members and management rather than written objective standards. The voting members of the Behavior Evaluation - Committee may -evaluate behavior based on their own observations and/or on the written reports of other staff members. The voting members are not required to directly observe a dog's behavior, and in some cases have not made direct observation, but they do have access to video documentation of a dog's behavior. Voting members come to their own conclusions based on their own understanding of dog behavior and rehabilitative potential. OCAC does not have a professional licensed, trained, or certified animal behaviorist on - _ - --staff to oversee the dog enrichment programs, resulting in dogs with declining behavior _ being placed at greater risk of being euthanized. Voting members of the Behavior Evaluation Committee are not required to certify or participate in animal behavior education programs. The Behavior Evaluation Committee meets once per week and participation of the voting member from any one of the three voting departments may be ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 25 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice delegated to a lesser experienced staff member when the regular voting member is unavailable. The Grand Jury reviewed dog behavior -related euthanasia data and Asilomar outcomes from the fourth quarter of 2018 to the third quarter of 2022 to evaluate the nature of dog behavioral euthanasia at the shelter over time. The chart below shows quarterly dog behavior euthanasia at OCAC for the third quarter of 2018 through the third quarter of 2022. Euthanasia rates are represented as a percent of total dog Asilomar outcomes by quarter. Juvenile dogs are included in the review because the shelter's juvenile dog population is subject to behavioral euthanasia. The Grand Jury found that for the dogs euthanized for behavior during the period under review, 7.4% of the dogs were no more than 6 months old and 14.2% were less than 1 year old. The Grand Jury was unable to - determine why dogs less than one year in age would warrant behavioral euthanasia. Figure 3 - Dog Euthanasia Rates (Behavioral) 6% 5% 4% 3% All Dogs Euthanized for Behavior as % of all All Dog ASILOMAR Outcomes ,.............. Average = 1.19% .......... .............-. Average = 3.41 % 0% ...._.. . 04 01 Q2 -__Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 t Q1 ; Q2 Q3 j Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 20182019 2020 2021 2022 Dog behavioral euthanasia rates increase at OC Animal Care between the second and third quarters in 2021 Figure 3 illustrates that dog behavior -related euthanasia rates increased at OCAC between the second and quarters of 2021. The average dog behavioral euthanasia rate prior to the end of the second quarter of 2021 was 1.19% of all dog Asilomar outcomes. Beginning in the third quarter of 2021 and through the third quarter of 2022, the average dog behavioral euthanasia rate increased to 3.41 % of all dog Asilomar outcomes, an increase of 187%. The increase is statistically significant. (See Appendix 2) ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 26 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Impediments to the Investigation The Grand Jury's function is to investigate the operation of the various officers, departments, and agencies of the local government. Article 1, Section 23 of the California Constitution states: "One or more grand juries shall be drawn and summoned at least once a year in each county. " Provisions of the California Penal Code define the scope and limitations of a grand jury's authority: Penal Code Section 916: ... Rules of procedure shall include guidelines for that grand jury to ensure that all findings included in its final reports are supported by documented evidence, including ... official records, or interviews attended by no fewer than two grand jurors and that all problems identified in a final report are accompanied by suggested means for their resolution, including financial, when applicable. Penal Code Section 921: The grand jury is entitled to the examination, without charge, of all public records within the county. Penal Code Section 925: The grand jury shall investigate and report on the operations, accounts, and records of the officers, departments, or functions of the county ... The investigations may be conducted on some selective basis each year ... Penal Code Section 925 (a): The grand jury. may, at all times, request the advice of the court, or the judge thereof, the district attorney, the county counsel, or the Attorney General ... As a department of Orange County government, the County Counsel's office provides - -- -legal counsel -and services to the Orange County Board of Supervisors and all other Orange County departments and agencies, including the Grand Jury. At the start of a_Grand _Jury's one-year term, County Counsel assigns an individual attorney within its office to serve as the Grand Jury's primary attorney. Because the - - individual serving astheGrand Jury's counsel is also assigned to other departments or - -- -. - agencies _within Orange -County government, there is the potential for the Grand Jury's designated- primary counsel to have a conflict of interest when the Grand Jury investigates a department or agency otherwise served by the primary attorney. To = ensure continuity of legalserviceto the Grand Jury, the County Counsel's office also assigns a back-up attorney that provides service to the Grand Jury when the primary counsel is conflicted. The back-up attorney is selected so that at least the primary or ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 27 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice back-up would not have a disabling conflict — that is, one or the other would be available to serve the Grand Jury in any investigation not directly related to the County Counsel's office itself. Back-up counsel advises the Grand Jury on those matters only when the primary attorney is conflicted. Early during its one-year term and early in its investigation, the Grand Jury learned that its primary counsel had a conflict of interest with its investigation of OCAC. The County Counsel's office explained, and the Grand Jury understood, that the services of the County Counsel's office would continue through the back-up attorney assigned for such circumstances. Initially, during the early stages of its OCAC investigation, the Grand Jury received the legal advice and assistance of the back-up attorney in the County Counsel's office. Later during its investigation of OCAC, the Grand Jury inquired into the shelter's prior TNR program and the program's termination in early 2020. The Grand Jury learned the program was terminated after a cease -and -desist demand to stop the program was --received from a lone individual residing outside of Orange County. The Grand Jury was informed that the County Counsel's office, in response to a request by OCAC to review the cease -and -desist demand, issued an opinion to the Orange County Board of Supervisors and OCAC about the shelter's TNR program that evidently led to a direction to terminate the program. In the course of the Grand Jury's investigation, including interviews with OCAC and OCCR staff and leadership, the County Counsel's office and its opinion were repeatedly cited as being the source of the decision to stop the TNR program. The Grand Jury understands County Counsel's role is to provide advice and counsel to the Board of Supervisors, County departments, and various County agencies, but that it has no decision -making authority over any division of County governance, except regarding its own internal functions. While the Grand Jury was skeptical that the County Counsel's office actually made; or had the authority to make, the decision to terminate the TNR program, the Grand Jury nevertheless understood that the County Counsel's opinion was pivotal to the decision. Therefore, the Grand Jury requested a copy of the opinion to learn if there was a clear impediment to or prohibition on a possible renewal of the TNR program. The Grand Jury requested a copy of the opinion from interviewees who were privy to the document or its contents. In addition, the Grand Jury asked the County Counsel's office for a copy of the opinion. In every instance, those requested told the Grand Jury the opinion is a privileged communication between the County Counsel's office and the Board of Supervisors and that only the Board of Supervisors has authority to release the document. Finally, the Grand Jury asked the Board of Supervisors, through its Chair, for ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 28 OF 51 Mom. Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice a copy of the opinion or alternatively for an identification of the legal authority reviewed in studying the issue, and stated the confidentiality of the document would be maintained, whereupon the Board of Supervisors declined to consider or include the request in its meeting agenda. Unfortunately, and not through a lack of trying, the Grand Jury has been unable to review or assess the basis of the opinion. During the Grand Jury's interviews, when various levels of leadership within OCAC asserted that County Counsel made the decision to terminate the TNR program, the Grand Jury always expressed its skepticism and inquired as to how County Counsel, an advisor to the County and OCAC, and only an advisor, could be making policy decisions for OCAC? The Grand Jury inquired and pressed its interviewees, asking if it was, in fact, a decision made at some level within OCAC's leadership, or by OCCR, or by the Board of Supervisors. When pressed, in every case, each interviewee modified their explanation and affirmed the decision had been theirs or that they had taken part in the decision, each taking personal responsibility for the decision. The Grand Jury was determined to obtain documentation of the decision as it continued to press for a copy of the County Counsel's opinion, The Grand Jury then requested all internal OCAC communications documenting the decision and/or order to stop the TNR program. The Grand Jury requested departmental communications instructing staff to stand down from the TNR program, whether from the OCCR to OCAC, OCAC to animal shelter leadership, or animal shelter leadership to shelter staff. Departmental communications about the TNR program are policy and procedure communications. The Grand Jury assumed that departmental communications would point to how and by whom the decision was made. The Grand Jury understands such communications are public records, not privileged communications. Nevertheless, the Grand Jury's request for documentation was denied by OCAC with the reason that such communications were privileged. Coincidental to the Grand Jury's :efforts to obtain a copy of the County Counsel's opinion, -- - - at the end of 2022, the County Counsel's office detached itself altogether from all _._ matters related to the Grand Jury's investigation of OCAC. The County Counsel's office informed the Superior Court and the Grand Jury that its entire office was conflicted with _.. regard.to.the-investigation into OCAC and would recuse itself from assisting the Grand ---- - - Jury in its investigation into all matters related to OCAC. No back-up attorney was provided and all communications ceased. Of note, the Grand Jury's investigation was not an investigation of the County Counsel's office. Rather, the Grand Jury was investigating an Orange County agency, a client of County Counsel, just as every Grand Jury investigation into County agencies represents an investigation into clients of the County Counsel. When the County - Counsel's office recused itself from the Grand Jury's OCAC investigation, it did not --explain or cite -any specific aspect of the OCAC investigation that makes it exceptional -from any other of the ongoing Grand Jury investigations into County departments or agencies. Without the services of the County Counsel's office, the Grand Jury suffered a setback in its investigation of OCAC. The pace of the investigation slowed as time and resources ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 29 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice were directed toward arranging for alternative outside counsel at the recommendation and with the support of the Superior Court. After losing approximately six weeks, the Grand Jury was able to engage alternative outside counsel in early February of 2023. As of the publication of this report, the Grand Jury was not able to confirm the logic, reasoning, or basis of the County Counsel's opinion, or even whether in fact the County Counsel advised against the continuance of the TNR program. Moreover, the Grand Jury cannot confirm whether, or who, or at what level of authority, within the County government the decision to end TNR emanated. As a consequence, the Grand Jury cannot verify that any such decision was ever actually made, or communicated at any level of authority, by anyone within Orange County's governing hierarchy and, more importantly, why any such decision was made. The only fact the Grand Jury can confirm with any confidence is that the TNR program was terminated in or about early 2020. CONCLUSION OCAC has been a source of public concern since the 1990s, with five previous Orange County .Grand Jury reports and an Orange County Performance Audit detailing troubling conditions at the OCAC shelter. This Grand Jury report shines a light on deficiencies at the shelter still needing resolution. The Grand Jury believes that if the recommendations included in this report are implemented: • Internal and external communications at OCAC will improve. • The reallocation of staffing positions within the organization, increasing the number of Animal Care. Attendant positions and employing an animal behaviorist or trainer, will improve general animal welfare at the shelter. • Improvements in the timely filling of staff vacancies will enhance shelter operations and overall staff morale. • The adoption process will be more public -friendly, leading to more adoptions. • ,The behavioral euthanasia decision process will be standardized, articulated, and documented, leading to consistent behavioral euthanasia outcomes. • -The shelter's Policies and Procedures will be correct and up to date. • _..00AC and Orange County rescue organizations and animal advocates can work -- - toward mending their relations for the welfare of the animals. _... - •==The shelter's TNR program will be re-evaluated, reconsidered and reinstated. - - --- - _ • The shelter's volunteers will be more integrated into the shelter's personnel team and communications. The Grand Jury conducted many interviews with shelter personnel. The Grand Jury is very impressed with their sense of dedication and earnest concern for the welfare o shelter animals. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 30 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice FINDINGS In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2022-2023 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) Responses from each agency affected by the Findings presented in this section. The Responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled, "Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice, The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange," the 2022-2023 Grand Jury has arrived at seventeen Findings, as follows: Management: F1 Management has limited flexibility utilizing personnel within Orange County Animal Care across departments due to structured work rules, volunteer work restrictions, and employees working in departmental silos. F2 Low staff morale exists within Orange County Animal Care. F3 Orange County Animal Care staffing is negatively impacted by vacant positions remaining unfilled for greater than six months due to burdensome hiring processes. This delay in recruitment and completion of hiring has resulted in qualified candidates declining job offers. F4 Based upon industry standards and best practices, Orange County Animal Care kennel attendants are understaffed to meet the needs of animals under care. F5 Orange County Animal Care's operating policies and procedures manual is out of date. F6 The Orange County Animal Care Volunteer program was stopped during COVID-19 and restarting the program has been slow, resulting in decreased animal socialization and enrichment. Animal Welfare F7 Orange County Animal Care's Behavior Evaluation Committee evaluates dogs for euthanasia without written guidelines, policies, or procedures, resulting in =--inconsostent outcomes over time. Behavior evaluated euthanasia outcomes are dependent on the experience and personal considerations of the individual -committee members and management rather than written objective standards. - F8-- -- The rate of behavioral euthanasia of dogs has increased significantly over the last 2 years. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 . PAGE 31 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice F9 Orange County Animal Care does not employ a professional or trained and certified animal behaviorist to oversee the shelter's dog enrichment program, resulting in dogs with declining behavior being placed at greater risk of being euthanized. F10 While many county and city animal shelters throughout the state have active Trap, Neuter, and Return programs, Orange County Animal Care stopped its Trap, Neuter, and Return program, reportedly on the basis of the County Counsel's legal opinion that the program violates a California statute related to willful animal abandonment. F11 The termination of the Trap, Neuter, and Return program is correlated with an increase in adult cat euthanasia rate at the shelter. F12 There have been public concerns and requests expressed over the years for public programs to include a spay/neuter program by Orange County Animal Care. Communication / Outreach F13 The current adoption appointment system restricts public access to the dog kennels, thereby limiting potential adopters' access to all available animals. F14 Orange County Animal Care's engagement with some animal rescue partners is negatively impacted due to differences of opinion in appropriate animal care policy. F15 Internal and community engagement does not adequately communicate the shelter's mission and operating strategy. F16 The information currently on the Orange County Animal Care website for low- cost spay/neuter is not up to date with regard to referrals and prices for spay/neuter procedures. Impediments to the Investigation - F17 The OC County Counsel's office misstated to the Grand Jury the scope of its commitment to serving and assisting the Grand Jury in its investigations into County governance respecting managing conflicts between the Board o -- - Supervisors, OC departments and agency clients, and the Grand Jury. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 32 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2022-2023 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the Recommendations presented in this section. The Responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled "Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice, The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange," the 2022-2023 Grand - Jury makes the following seventeen recommendations: Management: R1 By October 1, 2023, OC Human Resource Services should review and update recruitment strategies to significantly increase the timeliness of recruitment of -vacant positions and to anticipate vacancies due to retirement, resignations, transfers. (F3) R2 By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should review hiring practices to facilitate process improvements to expedite filling OCAC vacancies. (F3) R3 By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines and to provide appropriate staffing allocations for animal care, feeding and enrichment. (F3, F4) R- 4- By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of all positions within the _OCAC and reallocate resources to increase Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines to provide appropriate staffing for animal care, feeding, and enrichment. (F3, F4) -R5 By -December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should - -- review and update policies, procedures, guidelines, and practices to assure they - - - - - ------ are accurate and reflect current operating practices. (F5) R6 Animal By June 30, 2024, the Board of Supervisors should evaluate the strategic option of creating a Joint Powers Authority for the County and fourteen contract Cities to take ownership and shared responsibility for the financial and operating policies and practices of OCAC. (F1 thru F16) Welfare R7 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should establish written guidelines, policies, and procedures as standards for evaluating animal behavior for use by the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F5, F7) ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 33 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice R8 By December 31, 2023, in the interests of transparency, Orange County Animal Care management should add a representative from a rescue organization to serve as a non -voting, at -large member on the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F7, F14) R9 By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should hire an animal behaviorist or certified dog trainers to work with aggressive animals to reduce the high rate of dogs being euthanized and enhance their adoptability. (F8, F9) RIO By December 31, 2023, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and Orange County Animal. Care management should request that County Counsel reconsider its opinion about the shelter's former Trap, Neuter, and Return program, or seek an independent second opinion to County Counsel's opinion, to ascertain whether the program can be re-established, or a modified version of the program can be implemented. (F10, F11) R11 By July 1, 2024, Orange County Animal Care should implement a low-cost public spay/neuter program. (1712) Communication / Outreach R12 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should hold all - hands staff meetings at least every quarter. (F1, F2) R13 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should conduct annual surveys of staff to monitor morale and identify opportunities for operational improvement. (F1, F2) R14 By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should open the shelter to the public for walk throughs to maximize opportunities for the public to adopt animals under the care of the shelter. (F13) R15 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should look for new ways to be more inclusive and engaged with volunteers and the rescue - organizations that are necessary for the shelter's success. (F14, F15) R16 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care should schedule quarterly meetings with community stakeholders to facilitate transparency and engagement. (F14, F15) R17 - -By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should update the information currently on its website for low-cost spay/neuter of feral cats with regard -to referrals and prices for spay/neuter procedures. (F16) ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 34 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Impediments to the Investigation R18 Beginning with the 2023/2024 Grand Jury training, and all training thereafter, County Counsel should provide detailed instruction about the circumstances under which the County Counsel's office might recuse itself from assisting with Grand Jury investigations and the alternatives available to the Grand Jury under such circumstances. (F17) ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 . PAGE 35 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice REQUIRED RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official's control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented _.....-_.- in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the - -- - scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to - - be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 36 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code §933.05 are required and requested from: Findings - 90-day Response Required Orange County Board of F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, Supervisors: F13, F14, F15, F16, F17 City of Anaheim: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Brea: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Cypress: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Fountain Valley: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Fullerton: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Huntington Beach: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Lake Forest: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Orange: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Placentia: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of San Juan Capistrano: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Santa Ana: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Tustin: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Villa Park: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 City of Yorba Linda: F4, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F15, F16 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 37 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Recommendations — 90-day Response Required Orange County Board of R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12, Supervisors: R13, R14, R15, R16, R17, R18 City of Anaheim: R6 City of Brea: R6 City of Cypress: R6 City of Fountain Valley: R6 City of Fullerton: R6 City of Huntington Beach: R6 City of Lake Forest: R6 City of Orange: R6 City of Placentia: R6 City of San Juan Capistrano: R6 City of Santa Ana: R6 City of Tustin: R6 City of Villa Park: R6 City of Yorba Linda: R6 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 38 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice REQUESTED RESPONSES Findings - 90-Day Response Requested Orange County Animal Care: F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F14, F15, F16 OC Human Resources F1, F2, F3, F4, F9 Services: Orange County County F10, F11, F17 Counsel: Recommendations - 90-Day Response Requested Orange County Animal Care: R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, R14, R15, R16, R17 OC Human Resources R1, R2, R9, R13 Services: Orange County County R10, R18 Counsel: ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 39 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice REFERENCES American Bar Association, Tort, Trial, and Insurance Practice Section. 'Report to the House of Delegates Resolution 102B." 2017.Accessed September 30, 2022. American-Bar- Association-TNVR-report pdf (maddiesfund.org) American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. "Asilomar Accords: Definitions." 2004. Accessed January 28, .2023, Asilomar. Accords: -Definitions I ASPCA Association of Shelter Veterinarians "Shelter Terminology." 2017. Accessed March 25, 2023, Microsoft Word - Shelter Terminology (sheltervet.orl - City of Garden Grove. "Ordinance NO.2911". 2019. Accessed January 28, 2023. 11-26- 19 cc Ordinance Amending Animal and Fire Dept Related Regulations.pdf City of WestHollywood: "An Ordinance of the City of West Hollywood Establishing a Trap- __ Neuter -Return Program for Community Cats; Amending the Language of the Municipal Code to Reflect a Change in Nomenclature From "Feral Cats" to Community Cats"; Updating Section 9.48.080 To Reflect the Current Code Provision Regarding Animal Noise and Determination that the Project is Exempt From CEQA." November 4, 2019. "California Population." Accessed March 22, 2023. Orange County California Population 2023 (world_populationreview.coml Human Animal -Support Services. Animal Shelter Speak: Understanding Common Animal _ Services Jargon. 2023. Accessed March 25, 2023. Animal Shelter Sneak: Understanding Common Animal Services Jargon.,- HASS(human animalsupportservices.oral - Newbury, Sandra -et al. Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters. The Association of Shelter Veterinarians.-2010. shelter-standards-oct2011-wforward pdf (sheltervet.org). - - North Shore Animal League. "Did you Know?" 2011. Accessed February 24, 2023 cats - multiply-pyramid.12df (animalleague.orZj - Orange County Animal Care "Strategic Plan - 2018" accessed January 28, 2023. ocac 2018 strategic 121an.12df (stayinalivelongbeach.or Orange County. Office of Performance Audit. "Performance Audit of Orange County Animal Care." Final Report (#141505). Orange County California, 2015. Microsoft Word -Animal Care Report (ocgov.coml Orange County Grand Jury 2014-2015. "If Animals Could Talk About the Orange County - Animal Shelter." 2015. Accessed January 28, 2023. Shelter Performance V8R2 web.pdf (ocgrandjur .ors Orange County Grand Jury 201472015. "The Orange County Animal Shelter: the Facility, the Function, the Future." 2015, Accessed January 28, 2023.00 animal shelter.pdf (ocgrandjurv.org . ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 40 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Orange County Grand Jury 2007-2008. "Is Orange County Going to the Dogs". 2008. Accessed January 28, 2023. 2023, IS ORANGE COUNTY GOING TO THE DOGS (ocg-randjury org) Orange County Grand Jury 2003-2004. "The Orange County Animal Shelter, Are Improvements Needed?" 2004. Accessed January 28, 2023. Microsoft Word - Animal ShelterReport draft 12a doc (ocgrandjury org). Orange County Grand Jury 1999-2000. "We Can do Better... Improving Animal Care in Orange County." 2000. Accessed January 28, 2023. FINAL.PDF (ocarandiury.org) ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 41 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice APPENDIX 1 Table 1 - Adult Cat Euthanasia and TNR Rates by Quarter Adult Cats Euthanized as a % of Adult Cat 'Adult Cat TNR Asilomar Outcomes net Outcomes as % of adult of TNR Outcomes Cat Asilomar Outcomes 2018 Q3 23.17% 40% Q4 17.27% 36% 2019 Q1 17.42% 41 Q2 26.81 % 49% Q3 24.95% 47% Q4 18.77% 31 % 2020 Q1 18.08% 37% 42.65% 5% Q2 Q3 41.67% 4% Q4 25.50% 1 % 2021 Q1 27.50% 0% Q2 27.31 % 0% Q3 25.86% 0% Q4 23.21 % 0% 2022 Q1 21.93% 0% Q2 30.12% 0% Q3 24.73% 0% Q4 26.26% 0% Table 2 - Adult Cat Euthanasia Sample T-Test Adult Cats Euthanized as a % of Non-TNR Asilomar Outcomes Q3 2018 thru Q1 2020 vs. Q2 2020 thru Q4 2022 TNR period vs. No TNRperiod) t-Test Two -Sample Assuming unequal vaiwiiuca - Q3 2018 to Q1 Q2 2020 to End 2020 of Year 2022 Mean Variance 0.001571145 0.004841058 Observations 7 11 Hypothesized Mean Difference 0 df 16 't Stat -3.05329,28 P(T<=t) one -tail 0.003793173 t Critical one -tail 1.745883676 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 PAGE 42 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice APPENDIX 2 Table 3 - Dog Behavioral Euthanasia Rates by Quarter All Dogs Euthanized for Behavior as % of all Adult Dog ASILOMAR Outcomes Dogs All Dog Euthanized Asilomar % Dogs for Behavior Outcomes Euthanized 2018 Q4 8 1356 0.59% 2019 Q1 21 1385 1.52% Q2 15 1384 1.08% Q3 15 1522 0.99% Q4 16 1312 1.22% 2020 Q 1 13 1146 1.13% Q2 Q3 7 13 701 817 1.00% 1.59% Q4 13 791 1.64% 2021 Q 1 8 746 1.07% Q2 10 824 1.21 % 18 868 2.07% Q3 Q4 49 882 5.56% 2022 Q1 27 956 2.82% Q2 44 962 4.57% Q3 23 1143 2.01 % -- - Table 4 Dog Behavioral Euthanasia Rates 2 Sample T-Test All DogsIE anized,for Behavior as a %o of All Dog - - -- - ASILOMAR Outcomes Q4 2018 to Q2 2021;vs .Q3 2021 to Q3 2022 t-Test: Two -Sample Assuming Unequal Variances Q4 2018 to Q2 Q3 2021 to Q3 2021 2022 Mean 1.19% 3.41 % Variance 9.40995E-06 0.000251006 Observations 11 5 Hypothesized Mean Difference 0 df 4 t Stat-3.109244662 P(T<=t) one -tail 0.017949066 t Critical one -tail 2.131846786 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 . PAGE 43 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice APPENDIX 3 Orange County Grand Jury Animal Shelter Contract City Survey 1. How long has your city been serviced by the Orange County Animal Shelter? a. What factors motivated the city to contract with the Orange County Animal Shelter? 2. What Services have you contracted for the Orange County Animal Shelter? (i.e., Shelter; Animal Control, Licensing, other) 3. What Animal control and care services does the city continue to reserve for itself or contract out to other agencies or vendors not with the Orange County Animal Shelter? (i.e., Control, Licensing, other) 4. How often is the city contract with the Orange County Animal Shelter reviewed and renewed? 5. Describe any regularly scheduled processes the city has in place to review the quality of service provided by the Orange County Animal Shelter. - - a. Describe the measure or metrics the city uses when evaluating the Animal Shelter. Please provide a copy of the last review of the Animal Shelter conducted by the city. - - b. Describe any review of the Orange County Animal Shelter and the services it provides as part of Shelter contract review and renewal? c. Who conducts Animal Shelter reviews for the city. d. Are Animal Shelter reviews presented to the city council for their consideration? 6. Does your City have an appointed member of city staff to serve as liaison between the city and OC Animal Shelter management? a. How frequently does your city meet with the OC Animal She management? 7. As it relates to the sheltering and adoption services provided by the Orange County Animal Shelter(if any) describe your level of satisfaction or any concerns with the service and support. 8. As it relates to Animal Control services being provided (if any) describe your level of _satisfaction or any concerns with the service and support. 9. As it relates to Licensing fees and processing (if any) describe your level of satisfaction or any concerns with the service and support. -10. How reasonable are the County fees for providing this service? -11-. Have members of you community voiced any concern with Orange County Animal Shelter policies or practices. -a. Please provide the Grand Jury with the any of the city's complaint logs or records pertaining to the Orange County Animal Shelter. 12.Are there any improvements in the service OC Animal Shelter provides or in the City's relationship with the Shelter you would like to see? ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 44 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice APPENDIX 4 Orange County Grand Jury Independent City Shelter Survey 1. How is the shelter organized and management governance accomplished at your Center? 2. How many cats, dogs and other animals can you shelter? 3. What services do you provide your local community? 4. How many total staff and volunteers are working or engaged with the shelter? 5. -How many volunteers do you require on a daily or weekly basis? a. Do you have adequate volunteers? 6. Do you promote spay/neuter services to the members of your community? a. If yes, is there a cost to the individual? 7. From your perspective what are the challenges faced by your Center? 8. Does your center practice TNR (Trap Neuter Return)? - a. If no, was it ever in place and then discontinued - why? b. If yes, how effective is the program? 9._ Does your center accept healthy cats and put them up for adoption? a. If yes, please describe the process. 10. What are the parameters that guide euthanasia at your shelter? 11. Do you have an animal behaviorist on staff? If no, why not? 12. Do you have any interaction with the Orange County Animal Shelter? a. If yes, please describe. b. If no, why? 13. How is adoption handled in your center? (Adoption by appointment system, open visits, other)? 14, Do your adoption totals include totals transferred to rescues or does it apply only to private parties? 15. Please. provide statistics (attachment) for your center (intake, adopted, transferred to - ---shelter, euthanized, etc. by animal type for the current and past 3 years). 16. How does your center respond to complaints from the community and animal activists? 17. ff tracked, please provide statistics on complaints you received. -18.-Please_ provide.intake-statistics (by Cats and Dogs) for the current and 3 past years: a. Strays b. Relinquished by owner c. Owner intended Euthanasia d. Other Intakes 19; Please provide live outcomes statistics (by Cats and Dogs) for the current and 3 past years: 20. Adoptions a. Return to Owner b. Transferred to another agency c. Returned to Field - - - 21.-Please provide other outcomes statistics (by Cats and Dogs) for the current and 3 past years: a. Died in Care b. Shelter Euthanasia ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 45 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice APPENDIX 5 OCAC 4t" Quarter 2022 Asilomar Report Shelter Anintals Count National Shelter Statistics Project Data Matrix October December zozz OC Animal Care �'"q-@Yi4`i � Sf �i r '. � y l: � -Ft �t�i e ?i7i'Tkn '•R.e�F ! �a �..���t A BCG7NNlK(GS]IElTERC0U1NT: to/011203k R 777 309 R� li Stray/At Large - -286 836 ....... _..! �''3 R.Unquished by Owner 135 4 - 48 x lyd:ended Eutlun—ie— 0 0 0 0 (j weer E• �TSansl'eYYed ixx frown Aflency - other intalces (Includes Confiscatesresult ng from ? bites or cruelty investigations and Disaster related � mtpounds) .. ..., , ..... ...,...., ,,..z ,u-..rrrc tn..r..n..cFl 0 0 0 a _ 430 z0o7 209 125 16 31 8 174 . Adoption 476 72 159 895 1,602 Rctunred to owner 357 7 27 3 394 Transferred to.-d—Agency 149 so 78 185 442 j Returned to Field (TNR Program) 1 (}IlTC( 0 0 1 2 ," N 3 Died Lr Care 2- 4. 10 35 51 i 'Lost ira Care Shelter Euthanasia - 56 6 94 140 - _ - 296. { Ownee Intended Evthattasla* .�.,ry f Ul4[ES (N+•OiPtao�,& 0 0 �` C 3'06�'la� t ,v ... :� 0 0 0 fir,' -:? "'ts,&'(TETOffALllA1iER'f _ ._.. T _ I3DING SH(iI'l'EIt COUN9'c tzli><�zz 21' 10 ¢ 26 2S7 wi:..cra............�—. �.___-_... *Live release rate was calculated by dividing the live outcomes by the Total Asilomar Outcomes. Note that owner surrender for euthanasia (owner intended euthanasia) and died/lost in cm•e were remo-el fi•mn totals per the Asilomar accords formula. t **Sam rate includes animals surrenderedfor euthanasia as well as animals which were lost or died in care. *••"proof ofaniraalsufferingimpocting life quality or aggressive behavioro presenting a risk- to public safety are required by owrxers requesting this service. OC Animal Care iti3o victory Road, Tustin CA 92782 www.ocRgAaf9_,;kM ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 46 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice ABBREVIATIONS: ABA: American Bar Association ASPCA: The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ASV: Association of Shelter Veterinarians CDPH: California Department of Public Health HASS: Human Animal Support Services HSUS: Human Society of the United States OCAC: Orange County Animal Care OCCR: OC Community Resources OCGJ: Orange County Grand Jury OCHRS: OC Human Resource Services NACA: National Animal Control Association NGA: Non -government Organization TNR: Trap, Neuter, Return ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 47 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice GLOSSARY: Adoption Barriers Policies or procedures that make adoption, fostering, or volunteering a challenge. Asilomar Asilomar refers to an animal welfare industry conference held at Asilomar in Pacific Grove, California. Statistical guidelines developed from this meeting became known as the Asilomar Accords: Participating shelters compile their own data into `Asilomar' reports, publish their data, and forward their reports to Humane Rescue Alliance which compiles nationwide animal welfare statistics. Behavior Dogs Dogs identified as having challenging behaviors. Capacity for Care - Capacity for Care is an organization's ability to appropriately care for the animals it _serves. This is based on a range of parameters including, but not limited to, the number of appropriate housing units; staffing for programs or services; staff training; average length of stay; and the total number of reclaims, adoptions, transfers, returns, or other outcomes. Community Cat An unowned cat can be social with people or not. A "Community Cat" is an umbrella definition that includes any outdoor, free roaming cat. These cats may be "Feral" (un- socialized) or friendly or may have been born into the wild. Usually, a Community Cat is a friendly cat. Feral Cats Feral cats are not socialized to, and are extremely fearful of, contact with people. Typically, they do not respond well in captivity. A feral cat is typically born in the wild or outdoors with little to no human interaction. If you attempt to get too close or try to pet them, feral cats view your hand as a claw that will harm them and will hiss and/or run away. Feral cats are born from other ferals or from stray cats. Kill / No Kill - - - - Kill-/ No.Kill refers to a shelter's policy respecting euthanasia. A no kill shelter will not conduct euthanasia, with exceptions for humane reasons. Practices of no kill shelters .vary along a spectrum, that reject the use of euthanasia as a primary means of population control and health management. A kill shelter will conduct euthanasia for a variety of reasons that include animal control, medical and population control, and ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 48 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice behavior. Many municipal shelters are "kill' shelters as their mandates often include animal control. Kitten Season A busy time in the animal shelter world when feral and community cats have kittens. The season occurs during warm weather months. Also referred to as cat breeding season. Typically kitten season is March -October but varies from place to place and in some areas is year-round. Legal Retention The number of days a shelter is required by law to hold an animal for recovery by owner prior to placing the animal for adoption, for sale, or euthanizing. Live Outcome Types Adoption: an animal is adopted Return -to -Owner: an animal is returned to the custody of their human/s. Transferred -Out: an animal is transferred to the custody of another organization. Trap. Neuter Return: an animal is returned to their habitat or community after being treated for medical conditions, including spay/neuter. Return to Field: putting an animal back where it was found, often as part of a TNR program. Live Release Rate (Asilomar Report) Live Release Rate is the proportion of animals leaving the shelter alive to the total number of animals leaving alive plus the number of shelter directed euthanized animals. __Live__outcomes are usually achieved through adoption, reclaim by owner, transfer to another agency or other life-saving actions Other Outcome Types _== Died in Care: any animal who died while in the custody of the shelter, not by euthanasia. Euthanized/Kilied: any animal whose life was ended purposefully while in custody of the organization. Rescue Groups Rescue Groups are often operated by a network of foster home -based volunteers that may or may not be associated with a standing facility. These organizations often accept - -- -- - ---difficult=to-adopt animals from other shelters and may transfer them or facilitate adoptions outside of the shelter setting. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 49 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Return to the Field An animal who has been returned to its home or habitat. Also referred to as relocate, return to community, or return to wild. Save Rate (Asilomar Report) Save Rate is the proportion of animals leaving the shelter alive to the total number of animal outcomes. Shelter Types Municipal: an organization that provides the animal care services of a city, county, or cities or counties. Municipal Contract: A private organization that provides contracted services for the animal care of a city, county, or cities or counties. Rescue without a Municipal Contract: a private organization that has no affiliation to the city or county animal services. Foster based Rescue without Shelter: an organization who houses all animals in its custody in foster homes. Sanctuary: An organization that offers animals a place to live out the remainder of their life. Sometimes sanctuaries offer the option of adoption placement. Animal welfare sanctuaries often offer this space for animals that have exhausted all other local resources, as an alternative to death. Stray Hold The number of days a shelter must hold a stray animal before determining the outcome, as determined by local ordinances. These vary from place to place. TNR (Trap -Neuter -Return) -TNR (Trap=Neuter=Return) refers to an approach for managing community cats that is an alternative to shelter impoundment. In appropriately managed TNR programs, cats are humanely trapped and surgically sterilized, vaccinated, ear tipped, and returned to the location from where they were trapped. - TNR cats are often not taken into the custody of a spaying/neutering organization because they generally have established community colonies to which they are quickly returned. Community cat colonies are often under the care of a local human member of a community. Treatable Treatable means dogs and cats with medical or behavioral issues that can be rehabilitated and managed. ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 50 OF 51 Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice Unhealthy and Untreatable Unhealthy and untreatable means dogs and cats who, at or subsequent to the time they are taken into possession: 1. have a behavioral or temperamental characteristic that poses a health or safety risk or otherwise makes the animal unsuitable for placement as a pet, and are not likely to become healthy or treatable; or 2. are suffering from a disease, injury, or congenital or hereditary condition that adversely affects the animal's health or is likely to adversely affect the animal's health in the future, and are not likely to become healthy or treatable; or 3. are under the age of eight weeks and are not likely to become healthy or treatable, even if provided the care typically provided to pets by reasonable and caring pet guardians in the community. DISCLAIMER Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code Section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. ORANGE COUNTY GRAN® JURY 2022 1 2023 PAGE 51 OF 51 \ t /Ali NY t . d~fvPj - ©&'/ 2d / \ - ` � California Penal Code Sections §933 and , 033.05 (Note: To reduce grand jury requests for additional response information, the grand Jury has bolded those words in §933.05 which should be appropriately included in a response.) 933. (a) Each grand jury shall submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court at any time during the term of service of a grand jury. A final report may be submitted for comment to responsible officers, agencies, or departments, including the co qty board of supervisors, when applicable upon finding of the nres ding ii� ge that th r._ 1 ._-a1da- P ra.rnnrt is in compliance with this title. For 45 days after the end of the term, the foreperson and his or her designees shall, upon reasonable notice, be available to clarify the recommendations of the report. (b) One copy of each final report, together with the responses thereto, found to be in compliance with this title shall be placed on file with the clerk of the court and remain on file in the office of the cleric. The clerk shall immediately forward a true copy of the report and the responses to the State Archivist who shall retain that report and all responses in perpetuity. (c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years. (d) As used in this section "agency" includes a department. 933.05. (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. (e) During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. (f) A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) F1 Group homes too close to 1 The City agrees with this finding. N/A N/A N/A N/A one another contribute to Moreover, State Legislative actions under the problems associated Health and Safety Codes explicitly limit with overconcentration. local control and regulations by preemptively restricting the autonomy of cities and counties. Because of these constraints, the City does not have sufficient information to corroborate the finding or otherwise provide a more detailed response. a. The State actions establish that alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving six or fewer individuals cannot not be classified as boarding houses, rooming houses, institutions, or care homes for minors, the elderly, or individuals with mental health disorders and instead are to be treated as a residence. Moreover, these facilities should not be considered businesses operated for profit or distinguished in any way from single-family residences. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) b. Furthermore, the State stipulates that cities, counties, or other local entities cannot enforce restrictions on building heights, setback, lot dimensions, or sign placement for alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities with six or fewer occupants that are not applied equally to other single-family residences. The legislative preemption imposed by the State of California significantly hinders local authorities from exercising control over the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. F2 Common nuisances are 1 The City agrees with this finding. N/A N/A N/A N/A more likely and disruptive Moreover, State Legislative actions under when sober living homes Health and Safety Codes explicitly limit are concentrated in a local control and regulations by preemptively restricting the autonomy of small geographic area of a cities and counties. Because of these neighborhood. constraints, the City does not have sufficient information to corroborate the Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) finding or otherwise provide a more detailed response. a. The State actions establish that alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving six or fewer individuals cannot not be classified as boarding houses, rooming houses, institutions, or care homes for minors, the elderly, or individuals with mental health disorders and instead are to be treated as a residence. Moreover, these facilities should not be considered businesses operated for profit or distinguished in anyway from single-family residences. b. Furthermore, the State stipulates that cities, counties, or other local entities cannot enforce restrictions on building heights, setback, lot dimensions, or sign placement for alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities with six or fewer Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) occupants that are not applied equally to other single-family residences. The legislative preemption imposed by the State of California significantly hinders local authorities from exercising control over the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. F3 Some cities have 1 The City agrees with this finding, which is N/A N/A N/A N/A successfully addressed reflected in its efforts to enact an and informed community ordinance to exercise local control on the members about the matter in June 2021, which was ultimately unsuccessful with the City's Planning challenges faced in Commission. Moreover, State Legislative regulating group homes. actions under Health and Safety Codes explicitly limit local control and regulations by preemptively restricting the autonomy of cities and counties. Because of these constraints, the City does not have sufficient information to corroborate the finding or otherwise provide a more detailed response. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) a. The State actions establish that alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving six or fewer individuals cannot not be classified as boarding houses, rooming houses, institutions, or care homes for minors, the elderly, or individuals with mental health disorders and instead are to be treated as a residence. Moreover, these facilities should not be considered businesses operated for profit or distinguished in anyway from single-family residences. b. Furthermore, the State stipulates that cities, counties, or other local entities cannot enforce restrictions on building heights, setback, lot dimensions, or sign placement for alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities with six or fewer occupants that are not applied equally to other single-family residences. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) The legislative preemption imposed by the State of California significantly hinders local authorities from exercising control over the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. F4 Community satisfaction 1 The City agrees with this finding, which is N/A N/A N/A N/A was minimal when cities reflected in its efforts to enact an took the traditional public ordinance to exercise local control on the comment approach matter in June 2021, which was ultimately unsuccessful with the City's Planning towards addressing Commission. Moreover, State Legislative community complaints. actions under Health and Safety Codes explicitly limit local control and regulations by preemptively restricting the autonomy of cities and counties. Because of these constraints, the City does not have sufficient information to corroborate the finding or otherwise provide a more detailed response. a. The State actions establish that alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving six or fewer individuals cannot not be classified as boarding houses, Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) rooming houses, institutions, or care homes for minors, the elderly, or individuals with mental health disorders and instead are to be treated as a residence. Moreover, these facilities should not be considered businesses operated for profit or distinguished in any way from single-family residences. b. Furthermore, the State stipulates that cities, counties, or other local entities cannot enforce restrictions on building heights, setback, lot dimensions, or sign placement for alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities with six or fewer occupants that are not applied equally to other single-family residences. The legislative preemption imposed by the State of California significantly hinders local authorities from exercising control over the timing, manner, and location of Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) group homes with fewer than six occupants. F5 Cities are not utilizing 2 In Santa Ana, the Business License, Code N/A N/A N/A N/A police, fire, and code Enforcement, and Planning divisions are enforcement complaints often able to investigate and locate a as a means of locating and group home, depending on citizen complaints or observations of tracking Group Homes. neighborhood or property impacts (i.e., parking, solid waste generation, loitering, disturbances, etc.). F6 Cities are inhibited from 1 The City agrees with this finding, which is N/A N/A N/A N/A enacting and enforcing reflected in its efforts to enact an ordinances due to fears ordinance to exercise local control on the over the potential cost of matter in June 2021, which was ultimately unsuccessful with the City's Planning litigation. Commission. Moreover, State Legislative actions under Health and Safety Codes explicitly limit local control and regulations by preemptively restricting the autonomy of cities and counties. Because of these constraints, the City does not have sufficient information to corroborate the finding or otherwise provide a more detailed response. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) a. The State actions establish that alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving six or fewer individuals cannot not be classified as boarding houses, rooming houses, institutions, or care homes for minors, the elderly, or individuals with mental health disorders and instead are to be treated as a residence. Moreover, these facilities should not be considered businesses operated for profit or distinguished in anyway from single-family residences. b. Furthermore, the State stipulates that cities, counties, or other local entities cannot enforce restrictions on building heights, setback, lot dimensions, or sign placement for alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities with six or fewer occupants that are not applied equally to other single-family residences. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) The legislative preemption imposed by the State of California significantly hinders local authorities from exercising control over the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. F7 Several cities have created 2 There is not enough information readily N/A N/A N/A N/A an ordinance that requires available to understand and take a a ministerial permit or position on the statement that registration to operate a "many ... cities do not enforce their [group home] ordinances." However, a collective group home, however effort to understand these ordinances, the many of these cities do not reasons for which they were adopted, the enforce their ordinances. resources required to implement those ordinances, and the community input process would lead to a better assessment of whether ordinances are being enforced at the local level. F8 City and County officials 1 The City agrees with this finding. Without N/A N/A N/A N/A are deterred from a certified Housing Element, the City is regulating group homes by limited in its ability to exercise local California Housing and zoning and regulate residential Community developments. Development's housing element approval process. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) F9 Cities have historically 1 The City agrees with this finding, which is N/A N/A N/A N/A strategized and acted reflected in its efforts to enact an independently in ordinance to exercise local control on the addressing group home matter in June 2021, which was ultimately unsuccessful with the City's Planning challenges and solutions. Commission. Moreover, State Legislative actions under Health and Safety Codes explicitly limit local control and regulations by preemptively restricting the autonomy of cities and counties. Because of these constraints, the City does not have sufficient information to corroborate the finding or otherwise provide a more detailed response. a. The State actions establish that alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving six or fewer individuals cannot not be classified as boarding houses, rooming houses, institutions, or care homes for minors, the elderly, or individuals with mental health disorders and instead are to be treated as a residence. Moreover, these facilities should not be considered businesses Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) operated for profit or distinguished in anyway from single-family residences. b. Furthermore, the State stipulates that cities, counties, or other local entities cannot enforce restrictions on building heights, setback, lot dimensions, or sign placement for alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities with six or fewer occupants that are not applied equally to other single-family residences. The legislative preemption imposed by the State of California significantly hinders local authorities from exercising control over the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. F10 Well -operated group 2 The City disagrees with this finding. While N/A N/A N/A N/A homes can integrate ordinances are intended to offer a framework to provide for the integration of group homes into neighborhoods while Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) smoothly into providing regulatory oversight, there are neighborhoods. not enough full -implemented group home ordinances of a similar nature using similar regulatory methods in Orange County to determine their effectiveness and results over a statistically -significant period of time. F11 There is a lack of 1 The City agrees with this finding. N/A N/A N/A N/A regulatory oversight for Moreover, State Legislative actions under the health and safety of Health and Safety Codes explicitly limit residents of unlicensed local control and regulations by preemptively restricting the autonomy of group homes. cities and counties. Accordingly, the City does not have Because of these constraints, the City does not have sufficient information to corroborate the finding or otherwise provide a more detailed response. a. The State actions establish that alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving six or fewer individuals cannot not be classified as boarding houses, rooming houses, institutions, or care homes for minors, the Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Findings Can Be Requires City Accomplished City Need Finding Position Response to Finding by Staff Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Administratively Policy Allocation Date (Y or N) Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) elderly, or individuals with mental health disorders and instead are to be treated as a residence. Moreover, these facilities should not be considered businesses operated for profit or distinguished in any way from single-family residences. b. Furthermore, the State stipulates that cities, counties, or other local entities cannot enforce restrictions on building heights, setback, lot dimensions, or sign placement for alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities with six or fewer occupants that are not applied equally to other single-family residences. The legislative preemption imposed by the State of California significantly hinders local authorities from exercising control over the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Key Legend 1. The respondent agrees with the finding. 2. The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding in which case, the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Recommendations City Can Be Requires Need Position Accomplished City Council Budget Completion Recommendation (1, 2, 3, Response to Finding by Staff Policy Allocation Date or 4) Administratively Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) (Y or N) R1 Orange County cities and 2 This recommendation is implementable Y N N 2025 the County of Orange subject to inter -jurisdictional should address citizen coordination. Orange County contains 35 concerns regarding group local jurisdictions: 34 incorporated cities, and the County of Orange for homes by providing an unincorporated areas. This opportunity for an open recommendation can be implemented dialog where an with local Planning directors selecting a interdisciplinary panel of lead to coordinate efforts to begin the subject matter experts open dialogue and contact subject can share with attendees matter experts to begin providing input. the challenges cities are facing in the management of group homes. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F3, F4) R2 By December 31, 2024, 3 This recommendation requires further N Y Y 2025 Orange County cities and analysis and consideration for budget the County of Orange allocations, as the subject matter is should collaborate in complex due to layers of local, state, and federal regulations. The legislative their efforts to create preemption imposed by the State of ordinances for the California significantly hinders local regulation of group authorities from exercising control over homes, including the the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. Moreover, such an Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Recommendations City Can Be Requires Need Position Accomplished City Council Budget Completion Recommendation (1, 2, 3, Response to Finding by Staff Policy Allocation Date or 4) Administratively Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) (Y or N) development of model undertaking requires time and budget ordinances. (F6, F7, F9) resources for legal counsel to develop a well -formed ordinance, taking into account data to develop solid findings, community and industry input, and civic leaders' input. R3 Orange County cities and 3 This recommendation requires further N Y Y 2025 the County of Orange analysis and consideration for budget should pool resources for allocations, as the subject matter is defense of lawsuits complex due to layers of local, state, and federal regulations. The legislative challenging group home preemption imposed by the State of ordinances. To be California significantly hinders local implemented by July 1, authorities from exercising control over 2024. (F6, F8, F9) the timing, manner, and location of group homes with fewer than six occupants. Moreover, such an undertaking requires time and budget resources for legal counsel to develop a well -formed ordinance, taking into account data to develop solid findings, community and industry input, and civic leaders' input. Legal counsel assistance would also be required for defense and to assist with proactive enforcement against unlicensed/un permitted operators. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Recommendations City Can Be Requires Need Position Accomplished City Council Budget Completion Recommendation (1, 2, 3, Response to Finding by Staff Policy Allocation Date or 4) Administratively Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) (Y or N) R4 The County of Orange and 1 This effort is already underway, with y N N 2023 Orange County cities representatives from the City Attorney's should create a Task Office partaking in a task force meeting Force that includes on July 14, 2023 in Laguna Niguel for the California Sober Living and Recovery representatives from OC Task Force. More information is available cities, unincorporated online at: areas, and other entities www.soberlivingtaskforce.com. as appropriate and charge it with the responsibility of developing a plan to generate awareness -among State legislators and regulators of the need for improved regulations and management standards to ensure health and safety for Group Home residents. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F2, F10, F11) R5 Orange County cities and 2 This recommendation may be y N N 2023 the County of Orange implemented by modifying the City's should modify code land management system known as the Santa Ana Property Information Network Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" Responses to Recommendations City Can Be Requires Need Position Accomplished City Council Budget Completion Recommendation (1, 2, 3, Response to Finding by Staff Policy Allocation Date or 4) Administratively Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) (Y or N) enforcement report data (SAPIN). SAPIN attributes may be collection forms to modified to include a field or space to include a searchable field identify a suspected or known group that enables the home, including licensed/permitted. identification of a residence operating as a group home. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F5, F7, F11) Key Legend 1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. 2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. 3. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. 4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision -making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Grand Jury Findings — "Group Homes" b. A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. c. During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. d. A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. Grand Jury Findings — "The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange" Can Be Requires Need City Position Accomplished City Council Budget Completion Finding (1 or 2) Response to Finding by Staff Policy Allocation Date Administratively Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) (Y or N) F4 Based upon industry standards and best practices, Orange County N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A Animal Care kennel attendants are understaffed to meet the needs otherwise comment on the finding. of animals under care. F6 The Orange County Animal Care Volunteer program was stopped N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A during COVID-19 and restarting the program has been slow, resulting otherwise comment on the finding. in decreased animal socialization and enrichment. F7 Orange County Animal Care's Behavior Evaluation Committee N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A evaluates dogs for euthanasia without written guidelines, policies, or otherwise comment on the finding. procedures, resulting in inconsistent outcomes over time. Behavior evaluated euthanasia outcomes are dependent on the experience and personal considerations of the individual committee members and management rather than written objective standards. F8 The rate of behavioral euthanasia of dogs has increased significantly N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A over the last 2 years. otherwise comment on the finding. F9 Orange County Animal Care does not employ a professional or N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A trained and certified animal behaviorist to oversee the shelter's dog otherwise comment on the finding. enrichment program, resulting in dogs with declining behavior being placed at greater risk of being euthanized. Page 1 of 4 Grand Jury Findings — "The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange" Can Be Requires Need FindingCity Position Accomplished City Council Budget Completion (1 or 2) Response to Finding by Staff Policy Allocation Date Administratively Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) (Y or N) F10 While many county and city animal shelters throughout the state 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A have active Trap, Neuter, and Return programs, Orange County Animal Care stopped its Trap, Neuter, and Return program, reportedly on the basis of the County Counsel's legal opinion that the program violates a California statute related to willful animal abandonment. F11 The termination of the Trap, Neuter, and Return program is N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A correlated with an increase in adult cat euthanasia rate at the shelter. otherwise comment on the finding. F12 There have been public concerns and requests expressed over the 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A years for public programs to include a spay/neuter program by Orange County Animal Care. F13 The current adoption appointment system restricts public access to N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A the dog kennels, thereby limiting potential adopters' access to all otherwise comment on the finding. available animals, F15 Internal and community engagement does not adequately N/A City lacks foundational awareness to corroborate or N/A N/A N/A N/A communicate the shelter's mission and operating strategy. otherwise comment on the finding. F16 The information currently on the Orange County Animal Care website 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A for low-cost spay/neuter is not up to date with regard to referrals and prices for spay/neuter procedures. Page 2 of 4 Key Legend 1. The respondent agrees with the finding. 2. The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding in which case, the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor, Page 3 of 4 Grand Jury Recommendations — "The State of Animal Welfare Overseen by the County of Orange" Can Be Requires Need City Position Accomplished City Council Budget Completion Recommendation (1, 2, 3, or 4) Response to Finding by Staff Policy Allocation Date Administratively Direction (Y or N) (Y or N) (Y or N) R6 Animal By June 30, 2024, the Board of Supervisors should 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A evaluate the strategic option of creating a Joint Powers Authority for the County and fourteen contract Cities to take ownership and shared responsibility for the financial and operating policies and practices of OCAC. (F1 thru F16) Key Legend 1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. 2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. 3. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. 4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. a. However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision -making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. b. A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. c. During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. d. A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. Page 4 of 4