HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 14688 (Grand Jury Response on Wildfire Preparedness)RESOLUTION NO. 14688
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE CITY’S
RESPONSE TO THE APRIL 25, 2019 MARIN COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY
REPORT ENTITLED "WILDFIRE PREPAREDNESS: A NEW APPROACH”
WHEREAS, pursuant to Penal Code section 933, a public agency which receives a Grand
Jury Report addressing aspects of the public agency’s operations must, within ninety (90) days,
provide a written response to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with a copy to the
Foreperson of the Grand Jury, responding to the Report’s findings and recommendations; and
WHEREAS, Penal Code section 933 specifically requires that the “governing body” of the
public agency provide said response and, in order to lawfully comply, the governing body must
consider and adopt the response at a noticed public meeting pursuant to the Brown Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Rafael has received and reviewed the Marin
County Grand Jury Report, dated April 25, 2019, entitled “Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”,
and has added the discussion of this report at the June 17, 2019 City Council agenda to consider
the City’s response;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Rafael
hereby:
1. Approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the City’s response to the Marin
County Grand Jury’s April 25, 2019 report, entitled “Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”, a
copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
2. Directs the City Clerk to forward the City’s response forthwith to the Presiding Judge
of the Marin County Superior Court and to the Foreperson of the Marin County Grand Jury.
I, Lindsay Lara, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution
was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the San Rafael City Council
held on the 17th day of June 2019, by the following vote to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, McCullough & Mayor Phillips
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Gamblin
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
UNIFIED RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY FINDINGS
All the agencies/jurisdictions required to respond to the “Wildfire Preparedness: A New
Approach” collaborated to create this response to the findings and recommendations. See the
attachments to this response which include agency/jurisdiction specific clarifications as needed
to augment this document.
F1. Existing vegetation management codes are both inconsistent and inconsistently
enforced.
Response: Agree.
Fire agency policies differ, as do inspection and enforcement procedures.
• City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
F2. There are not enough trained vegetation inspectors or fuel reduction crews.
Response: Agree.
Although fire agencies are doing their best to reduce vegetation around existing homes,
additional resources and dedicated staff are necessary to enhance existing efforts.
• City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
F3. Current vegetation enforcement procedures are slow, difficult and expensive.
Response: Agree.
Although each municipality has its own code enforcement procedures, a consistent countywide
approach would allow for a more efficient and effective enforcement effort.
• City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
F4. Government agencies and safety authorities cannot currently manage vegetation on
public lands.
Response: Partially Disagree.
While municipal governments do not have authority beyond their own jurisdiction, a coordinated
countywide effort could help bring focus and consistency, as well as potentially additional
resources, to enhance existing efforts on public lands.
Government agencies and safety authorities can and do manage vegetation on public lands
over which they have jurisdiction to the extent that resources and funding are available. Much
more can be done, which is one of the many reasons the Marin cities, towns, fire agencies and
County have formed a working group to explore the creation of a countywide wildfire prevention
program to be funded by a parcel tax on the March 2020 ballot.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 2 of 10
F5. All property owners are responsible for vegetation management on their property, yet
they are not sufficiently educated about vegetation management and many do not have
the physical and financial resources to create defensible space.
Response: Agree.
Although education has been provided through individual fire agencies and FIRESafe Marin, we
agree that education efforts need to be understood by broader sections of the community. Grant
programs should be considered for those that may not have the physical or financial means to
complete necessary work.
F6. Wildfire preparedness education is inconsistent and fails to reach most citizens,
especially parents of young children.
Response: Partially Disagree.
Education is offered in a consistent fashion countywide by the fire agencies and FIRESafe
Marin. The demographics of our hosted meetings/forums and exercises generally lack a
younger demographic - especially parents of young children. Agencies need to create new
forms of outreach to garner participation from this demographic.
F7. The most effective method of education is person to person in neighborhoods.
Response: Agree.
Defensible space home evaluations with a trained professional are the preferred and best
method for educating residents.
F8. Although Marin has 30 plus Firewise neighborhoods, the most in California, they only
cover a small percentage of population and land.
Response: Agree.
We agree that Firewise Communities are a great mechanism for bringing communities and
neighborhoods together. They provide an organized approach to reducing hazards and risks.
F9. Sufficient public funds have not been provided to sustain comprehensive wildfire
preparedness education.
Response: Agree.
Generally, fire agencies are funded for response and mitigation of emergency incidents.
Development into the Wildland Urban Interface and climate change, with attendant major fires in
recent years, are requiring resources greater than those available by local municipalities and fire
agencies.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 3 of 10
F10. Educating the public requires a different set of skills than firefighters usually have.
Response: Partially Disagree.
Firefighters have experience that adds value to educating the public; however, they also have
other, often more pressing responsibilities. Dedicated public education staff and defensible
space home evaluators can spend more quality time on task than Firefighters.
F11. Any hesitation to use the WEA system can be deadly even if its alerts might reach
people outside of its intended target zone.
Response: Partially Disagree.
All appropriate emergency alert systems should be used to the fullest capacity as soon as
possible depending on the conditions and needs to maximize safety. The WEA system is not
geographically specific and can bleed over to areas where evacuations are not necessary. This
would result in adding unnecessary traffic to already congested roadways impeding evacuation
egress of those most affected. We agree it is a useful tool, but it must be well-coordinated
between the incident commander and Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services.
F12. Alert Marin sends the most accurately targeted warnings to endangered
populations, but it reaches too few residents because it is not well publicized. Both Alert
Marin and Nixle require opt-in registration, a serious design flaw.
Response: Partially Disagree.
Nixle and Alert Marin are two very different systems. Nixle, by design, is an “opt-in” solution
providing general information to the public. Alert Marin is an emergency notification system.
Nixle and Alert Marin information is publicized at almost every community event hosted by Fire
Departments and Sheriff-OES, with information also available on social media and agency
websites.
Listed and unlisted/blocked Marin County landline and VoIP (Voice over Internet protocol)
phone numbers are already included in our emergency notification system (Alert Marin), unless
the owner specifically requests to have their phone number opted-out. Cell phone numbers are
not included in Nixle and do require registration in our Self-Registration Portal. We agree that
more of our residents need to “opt-in” with their cell phone numbers. Additionally, we support
changes in State law mandating that cellular information be accessible with an “opt-out”
provision like landlines and VoIP data. We are also pursuing newly available authority to
cooperate with utility companies to obtain customer cell phone numbers for these purposes.
We will work with legislators to support bills like SB 46 (Hueso; 2019) which would allow local
governments to enter into agreements to access resident cell phone contact information for
enrolling county residents in a county-operated public emergency warning system.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 4 of 10
F13. Sirens could be a useful and reliable warning system if their numbers and locations
were increased to broaden their reach and if they were enhanced with a customized
message through LRAD.
Response: Partially Disagree.
Long Range Acoustical Device (LRAD) is the name brand of one type of acoustical notification
system. This system may have limited reach and limited ability to be heard inside a building.
Local testing has provided mixed results based on topography and other outdoor existing noise.
This type of system will not be effective in some areas of the County.
F14. In the WUI and in many town centers, infrastructure and roads are inadequate for
mass evacuations.
Response: Agree.
• City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
F15. Evacuation routes are dangerously overgrown with vegetation and many evacuation
routes are too narrow to allow safe passage in an emergency.
Response: Agree.
Marin County has many narrow roads with limited access and overgrown vegetation, often in
sloped and difficult terrain. Much of the vegetation encroachment into the road right of way is
the responsibility of homeowners. Public works agencies regularly work with fire agencies
identifying and working in the most critical areas.
F16. Emergency planners often do not publicize evacuation routes due to their mistrust
of the public.
Response: Disagree.
In 2009 the Marin County Fire Agencies developed mutual threat zone maps, pre-identifying
primary and secondary evacuation routes as well as evacuation zones. This information is
available for first responders to access in conventional paper maps or online. It has also been
made available to mutual aid responders outside of Marin County. Fire agencies are in the
process of making these maps publicly available.
We do caution residents to take personal responsibility and identify and regularly travel different
routes away from their home. Wildland fires can be very dynamic and depending on wind and
topography can change direction with little to no warning. A pre-identified evacuation route may
not be the safest route for residents to take deepening upon the specific type and location of the
incident.
• City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 5 of 10
F17. Town councils, planners, and public works officials have not addressed traffic
choke points, and, in some instances, they have created obstacles to traffic flow by the
installation of concrete medians, bump outs, curbs, speed bumps, and lane reductions.
Response: Partially Disagree.
Although we agree that more needs to be done, we do not agree that public officials have not
attempted to address these issues to date. Additionally, while we agree that traffic flow in an
evacuation warrants renewed attention in our circulation planning, many of the elements labeled
as “obstacles to traffic flow” by the Grand Jury are intended to increase public safety on a daily
basis under regular conditions. Each agency must weigh these daily safety concerns against the
use of roads during an evacuation.
F18. No studies have been performed to determine how long it would take to evacuate
entire communities via existing evacuation corridors.
Response: Agree.
The fire chiefs are exploring opportunities with technology companies and higher educational
institutions studying this type of work. Large scale evacuation planning needs further study and
development within Marin.
F19. The implementation of traffic-light sequencing and coordination to allow mass
egress, and the conversion of two-way roads into one-way evacuation routes to ease
traffic congestion, are dangerously delayed and years away from being implemented.
Response: Agree.
Large scale evacuation planning needs to identify which corridors would benefit greatest from
contra-flow traffic-light sequencing. Coordination with public works agencies and identification of
funding sources would be needed to make this a reality.
F20. Public transit is a neglected asset of emergency response preparedness: all
operators except one transit agency are left out of the command structure and none is
integrated into the emergency radio communication system MERA.
Response: Partially disagree.
Use of the term “neglected’ suggests an active decision to exclude transit from emergency
response preparedness. The current arrangements reflect an assessment by transit officials of
their ability to respond to disasters. Many of these protocols reflect planning for a broad
spectrum of disasters that might occur, and it would be appropriate to revisit these protocols for
the “new normal” concerning wildfire preparedness and response to an event concentrated in
Marin County.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 6 of 10
F21. A bureaucratic culture of complacency and inertia exists in Marin. Government often
fails to act quickly to repair known gaps in emergency preparedness, to think flexibly,
and to prioritize safety in its planning and policies.
Response: Disagree.
We agree that more needs to be done to address this critical public safety issue in the face of
what now is commonly referred to as the “new-normal.” Accelerating climate change has led to
larger, costlier, and more frequent wildfires in the state than ever before, burning almost year-
round. Because of this, all fire agencies, the County, cities and towns are working together to
explore the creation a countywide wildfire prevention program.
F22. No countywide comprehensive, coordinated policies have been made and no funds
have been allocated to prepare for wildfires.
Response: Disagree.
There are several coordinated documents, policies or procedures within Marin County including:
Mutual Threat Zone Plan, Community Wildfire Protection Plan, and the 2017 North Bay
“Lessons Learned” report. All of Marin’s agencies are evaluating their budgets and making
difficult decisions to make more money available for wildfire preparedness. It is our belief that a
stream of revenue dedicated to this purpose is the best route to addressing the resource needs
identified in these documents.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 7 of 10
RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATIONS
The Marin County Civil Grand Jury recommends the following:
R1. Create a comprehensive, countywide vegetation management plan that includes
vegetation along evacuation routes, a campaign to mobilize public participation, and low-
income subsidies.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
The Marin cities, towns, fire agencies and the County are addressing this recommendation with
a working group to explore the creation of a countywide wildfire prevention program governed
by a countywide joints power authority. We agree that more needs to be done to address this
critical public safety issue in the face of what now is commonly referred to as the “new-normal.”
Accelerating climate change has led to larger, costlier, and more frequent wildfires in the state
than ever before, burning almost year-round. Because of this, all fire agencies, the County, and
its cities and towns are working together to explore the creation a countywide wildfire prevention
program.
The program scope for an ongoing, locally-controlled, countywide wildfire prevention program
would include the following:
• Fire fuel reduction and vegetation management
• Defensible-space home evaluations and education
• Evacuation planning and neighborhood preparedness
• Alert and warning enhancements
• Pursuit of grant funds for countywide efforts, as well as grant funding for to assist
seniors, financially disadvantaged and those with access and functional needs with
preparedness measures.
This program would require new ongoing funding. We are currently exploring a potential
countywide parcel tax measure in March 2020.
R2. Hire at least 30 new civilian vegetation inspectors and at least eight fire/fuels crews
focused on fuel reduction in the high risk areas of the county, including federal, state
and local public lands.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
As stated in our response to Recommendation No. 1, a countywide wildfire prevention initiative
would include expanded defensible-space home inspections and education. A working group of
fire chiefs and city/town managers are exploring options to ensure the most appropriate and
cost-effective solutions are considered to improve defensible space countywide. This enhanced
program would require new, ongoing resources. The staffing of this effort would be subject to
policy decisions of a countywide JPA and/or the governing board of responsible fire agencies.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 8 of 10
R3. Develop and implement a fast, streamlined procedure to enforce vegetation citations.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
Fire prevention officers throughout the county are working on a countywide, streamlined
approach updating codes and processes. It is the intention of the group to implement some
items as part of regular code adoption cycle this fall. Larger scale collaboration and a more
streamlined approach will be addressed as part of the countywide wildfire prevention program.
At the countywide level, our intention is to educate homeowners for cooperative compliance.
Addressing non-compliance would be a matter for each jurisdiction to address.
R4. Adopt and deliver a comprehensive education program focused on action for all
residents of Marin on a regular schedule by a team of expert trainers.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
A countywide wildfire prevention program would include a comprehensive education program
for all residents. Although agencies have made efforts to educate the public, without additional
resources to enhance existing efforts, we believe these efforts will continue to be insufficient
and not consistent throughout the County.
R5. Promote the creation of Firewise Communities in every neighborhood by all local
jurisdictions.
This recommendation has already been implemented.
As the Grand Jury report points out, Marin currently has over 30 Firewise neighborhoods. With
the creation of a countywide wildfire prevention program, our current efforts can be substantially
enhanced and expanded throughout the County.
R6. Employ individuals with skills in public speaking, teaching, curriculum design,
graphics, web design, advertising, community organization, community relations, and
diplomacy to educate the public.
This recommendation has already been implemented
We currently have very articulate fire professionals and FIRESafe Marin educating the public.
However, we recognize more needs to be done and this work may not need to be done by our
firefighters, who often have competing response priorities.
R7. Collect Marin residents’ information and add it to Alert Marin and Nixle databases to
make them opt-out systems.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
This recommendation would require changes in State law. We will work with legislators to
support bills like SB 46 (Hueso; 2019), which would allow local governments to enter into
agreements to access resident cell phone contact information for enrolling county residents in a
county-operated public emergency warning system.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 9 of 10
We are also pursuing newly available authority to cooperate with utility companies to obtain
customer data for these purposes, but state legislation would be needed to obtain cell phone
contact information.
R8. Expand the use of sirens with LRADs.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
Sirens and LRAD’s have limited reach and ability to be heard inside a building. Local testing has
provided mixed results based on topography and other competing outdoor existing noise. This
type of system does have valuable application in some areas within the County. For those
communities for which these logistical challenges can be overcome, there is considerable
appeal for technology such as LRAD’s, which carry a more specific message than sirens. To be
effective, sirens require communitywide understanding of their meaning and what is expected of
residents when they are sounded.
R9. Research, develop, and publish plans for the mass movement of populations along
designated evacuation routes.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
Large scale evacuation planning needs to identify which corridors would benefit the most from
contra-flow and traffic-light sequencing. The use of experts in this field should be engaged.
Coordination with public works agencies and additional funding from a countywide wildfire
prevention initiative will be a critical component to our success.
• City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
R10. Give the highest priority to mitigating known choke points and to maximizing the
capacity of existing evacuation routes.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
Large scale evacuation planning needs to identify “choke points”. The use of traffic analysis
experts in this field should be engaged. Coordination with public works agencies and additional
funding from a countywide wildfire prevention initiative will be a critical component to our
success.
R11. Incorporate and prioritize plans for mass evacuations in all pending and future
traffic/road projects along major escape routes.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
Consideration of mass evacuations is an important element for agencies to add to their
assessment of road-related capital projects. However, prioritizing evacuation plans above all
other considerations may lead to design decisions that impair other important considerations,
such as safe use of roads on a daily basis. A balanced lifestyle of each project is required.
• City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations
“Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach”
April 25, 2019
Unified Response Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations Page 10 of 10
R12. Educate, prepare, and drill for evacuations in all communities.
This recommendation has been implemented.
Although all Marin Fire agencies have done this work to some extent, a countywide wildfire
prevention program would substantially expand efforts to educate, prepare and drill for
evacuations through Marin.
City of San Rafael – see Attachment A.
R13. Fully integrate public transit into the MERA communications system without further
delay.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
The member agencies of MERA welcome the addition of transit agencies serving Marin. It will
be necessary to analyze how to integrate these agencies in a manner that is fair and equitable.
R15. Establish in the form of a Joint Powers Authority an umbrella organization for
wildfire planning and preparedness (vegetation management, public education, alerts,
and evacuation), funded by a ¼ cent sales tax.
This recommendation requires further analysis.
The Marin cities, towns, fire agencies and County are addressing this recommendation with a
working group to explore the creation of a countywide wildfire prevention program governed by
a countywide joints power authority. The program scope for ongoing, locally-controlled,
countywide wildfire prevention program would include the following:
• Fire fuel reduction and vegetation management
• Defensible-space home evaluations and education
• Evacuation planning and neighborhood preparedness
• Alert and warning enhancements
• Pursuit of grant funds for countywide efforts, as well as grant funding to assist seniors,
financially disadvantaged and those with access and functional needs with preparedness
measures.
This program would require new, ongoing funding. We are currently exploring a potential
countywide parcel tax measure in March 2020. Based on our feedback from Marin fire-
responsible agencies, we believe that a parcel tax is the appropriate funding mechanism.
In addition, we believe the Grand Jury’s recommendation may have been based on their
assumption that “each jurisdiction would have to pass exactly the same parcel tax measure for
the same amount at the same time.” It is worth noting that, based on the support of agencies
that are responsible for fire suppression, it is allowable for the Board of Supervisors to place a
single, countywide parcel tax measure on the ballot. A recent example is Measure A on the
November 4, 2014 countywide ballot, which implemented a countywide parcel tax for the Marin
Emergency Radio Authority (MERA). Therefore, the results of a countywide measure would
require a two-thirds support countywide, but would not require two-thirds support in each
jurisdiction.
City of San Rafael – Supplemental Responses to Findings F1, F2, F3, F14, F15, F16, and
Recommendations R9, R11 and R12
F1. Existing vegetation management codes are both inconsistent and inconsistently enforced.
While some polices are inconsistent across the county, the differences are largely related
towards moves by jurisdictions to strength codes to address the growing threat of wildfire. The
City of San Rafael adopted an aggressive vegetation plan in 2007, and actively works to remove
known high fire risk plants in the Wildland Urban Interface through inspections and notices.
F2. There are not enough trained vegetation inspectors or fuel reduction crews.
In addition, San Rafael works to reduce vegetation in open space, including fuel breaks and
creating defensible space around homes bordering public lands.
F3. Current vegetation enforcement procedures are slow, difficult and expensive.
In addition, San Rafael believes a uniform abatement process, including public hearings,
property inspections, and subsequent fuel reduction work would help improve the procedures
and progress fuel reduction efforts with incorporative property owners.
F14. In the WUI and in many town centers, infrastructure and roads are inadequate for mass
evacuations.
The City of San Rafael acknowledges many areas throughout the City and County have limited
evacuation routes. The City has included an evaluation of existing routes and needs for
improvements in the 38-point City Council approved Wildfire Action Plan. The City is also
committed to improving the way in which evacuation routes, associated planning, and areas of
refuge are shared with the public. The City is also committed to reducing the potential need for
mass evacuation through its vegetation management program and working to identify and share
community areas of refuge, in which residents can find temporary safety from a wildfire, until a
safe evacuation route to an evacuation center or shelter can be identified, coordinated, and
shared.
F15. Evacuation routes are dangerously overgrown with vegetation and many evacuation routes are too
narrow to allow safe passage in an emergency.
In addition, San Rafael believes limited funding and avenues for abatement proceedings limit
the ways in the City can address some areas of concern.
F16. Emergency planners often do not publicize evacuation routes due to their mistrust of the public.
In addition, San Rafael does not believe the lack of widely shared evacuation maps has to do
with mistrust of the public, but rather the variable nature of a wildfire and potential to cause
harm by committing to a singular publicized plan.
R9. Research, develop, and publish plans for the mass movement of populations along designated
evacuation routes.
In addition, the City of San Rafael Public Safety Staff currently has planned general evacuation
routes for the neighborhoods of San Rafael. City Public Safety Staff have worked closely with
county staff in developing the Mutual Threat Zone (MTZ) maps, including various evacuation
routes. Generally speaking evacuation routes are guidelines which must be flexible based on
the circumstances at the time of a critical incident. As conditions change in real time during an
incident, routes and plans change to keep evacuees out of harm’s way. While evacuation route
planning is essential, current information on environmental conditions during an incident will be
the ultimate determiner of safe routes and safe locations for staging evacuees.
City staff offer numerous community outreach and training events to help residents be better
prepared for a disaster. This includes information on evacuation routes and the importance of
knowing at least two ways out of their neighborhoods. Residents are encouraged to drive or
walk alternate routes on a regular basis. The City also looking to expand outreach relating to
areas of refuge and helping residents identify areas that may be safe to wait out a fire until a
safer evacuation is possible.
The recently adopted San Rafael Wildfire Prevention and Protection Plan also addresses
evacuation (item 32), including expanding support of neighborhood evacuation drills and
coordination with transportation providers.
R11. Incorporate and prioritize plans for mass evacuations in all pending and future traffic/road projects
along major escape routes.
In addition, as traffic signal improvement projects take place, the City of San Rafael is continually
improving signalization throughout the city to give San Rafael the ability to modify traffic
patterns during emergencies. The City is installing intersection monitoring equipment, new
controllers, new signal heads and mast arms, fiber-optic cabling and other improvements to
provide dynamic and controllable signals as it upgrades intersections. These improvements will
allow San Rafael to monitor and manage traffic flows in high volume circumstances including
during emergencies.
R12. Educate, prepare, and drill for evacuations in all communities.
In addition, the City of San Rafael has provided information to residents regarding wildfire
danger as well as other natural disasters. These information sessions have often come in the
form of public safety personnel presentations at neighborhood association gatherings. These
presentations have taken place in the recent past and are ongoing. Any trainings or evacuation
plans would be strictly scenario-based as wildfires are unpredictable and specific to
environmental conditions at the time making specific plans regarding these events
problematic. The City is also working on creating a template that can be used by neighborhood
groups to facilitate family evacuation drills and neighborhood safety fairs.
2018–2019 MARIN COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY
Wildfire Preparedness
A New Approach
Report Date: April 18, 2019
Public Release Date: April 25, 2019
Marin County Civil Grand Jury
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
SUMMARY
Marin faces unprecedented danger to life and property from wildfire. The Grand Jury reviewed
the conditions that make us vulnerable to wildfire, assessed the plans currently in place to correct
them, and recommends a new approach to meeting these challenges. Four areas of vulnerability
stand out:
Vegetation Management: Fuel conditions make Marin extremely vulnerable to wildfires.
Through a combination of aggressive fire suppression and environmental policies, overgrown
vegetation has created hazardous fuel loads throughout the county. The policies and procedures
intended to manage and reduce vegetation are inadequate. Too few inspectors are available to
determine compliance, and enforcement is too slow.
Educating the Public: The public’s ignorance of how to prepare for and respond to wildfires
makes Marin vulnerable. Most people do not know how to make their homes fire resistant or
create defensible space by cutting back vegetation. Many have failed to collect emergency
supplies or plan for evacuations. Nearly 90% of the county’s residents have not signed up to
receive emergency alerts. Programs to educate the public for wildfire are not well known and are
offered infrequently. The county’s only organization assigned to educate the public about
wildfires is understaffed.
Alerts: The two crucial emergency alert systems in the county have a flaw that restricts their
reach. Both Alert Marin and Nixle, as opt-in systems, warn only those who have registered.
Evacuations: Evacuation planning is also a grave concern. Marin’s topography creates great
danger for those who live far from the main evacuation routes. Most connecting roads are narrow
and overgrown. Some are constricted by traffic calming obstacles such as concrete medians, and
bump outs which impede traffic in emergency evacuations. Plans to ease emergency traffic flow
such as traffic-light sequencing and the conversion of two-way roads to one-way flow corridors
are years away from implementation. Marin’s roads lack the capacity for a mass evacuation in
personal vehicles. Public transit is a neglected piece of evacuation preparedness and is
underused. Inertia and complacency have prevented a proactive and nimble response to wildfire
dangers.
The Grand Jury Proposes: The creation of a joint powers authority to coordinate a
comprehensive, consistent approach to pre-ignition planning funded by a ¼ cent sales tax. This
new approach will remedy the gaps in our preparedness and demonstrate our political will to
improve wildfire safety in Marin.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 2 of 37
INTRODUCTION
The conditions that made wildfire a distant and unlikely risk have now changed. Through a
combination of new weather patterns, aggressive suppression of natural wildfires, and pro -
vegetation environmental policy, Marin has become extremely vulnerable to devastation from
wildfires.
We are living in a powder keg.
Marin’s first responders are highly trained and dedicated specialists who excel in fighting fires.
Mutual aid among fire agencies and disaster coordinators operates seamlessly, and countywide
agencies meet regularly to discuss pre-ignition (before a fire) and pre-suppression (before a fire
is extinguished) preparation. However, there are significant disparities among fire districts in the
policies applicable to vegetation management, education of the public, evacuations and use of
sirens.
Considering Marin’s current state of preparedness, citizens should not assume that first
responders will be able to save them from the horrors of a wildfire like those experienced during
Butte County’s Camp Fire. The deadly threat of fire creates an urgent need for new policies for
wildfire preparedness which must be implemented without delay. These policies and practices
must be made a top priority to ensure the public’s safety.
Marin County has been warned repeatedly that it stands one spark away from a major
conflagration, but many of the county’s governments continue to conduct business as usual.
Uncoordinated pre-ignition planning, jurisdictional rivalries, and a glacial pace for
implementation of improvements has left the public in grave danger.
This report argues for a change in civic culture and suggests a mechanism to address many of the
inadequacies in wildfire preparedness. The Grand Jury recommends the creation of a countywide
umbrella agency to fund, coordinate and lead pre-ignition and pre-suppression planning.
METHODOLOGY
To prepare this report, the Grand Jury:
■ Interviewed county officials and fire chiefs.
■ Interviewed individuals in law enforcement, arboriculture, emergency planning, wildfire
education, public advocacy, transportation, and public transit.
■ Surveyed current fire preparedness procedures and practices.
■ Reviewed newspaper articles.
■ Examined websites.
■ Studied wildfire and firefighting blogs.
■ Reviewed emergency alert platforms.
■ Researched emergency transportation studies.
■ Considered previous Grand Jury wildfire reports.
■ Visited 2017 and 2018 wildfire sites in Sonoma and Butte Counties.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 3 of 37
DISCUSSION
Vegetation Management
The danger of a catastrophic wildfire in Marin exists in part due to vegetation management
policies. Approximately 60,000 acres fall within the wildland urban interface (WUI), where
residences are intermixed with open space and wildland vegetation. The Marin County Fire
Department estimates there are upwards of 69,000 living units valued at $59 billion within this
area, which borders virtually every city and town in Marin. While vegetation management is
critical throughout the county, its importance is elevated in areas where homes and residences
are within the WUI.1
Photographs of Marin County in the first half of the 20th Century reveal a landscape of open
grassland with a smattering of trees and bushes. When the Golden Gate Bridge opened, many
new homes were built, and more vegetation was planted. Marin now consists of homes,
businesses, and shopping centers surrounded by densely overgrown vegetation. This overgrowth
constitutes an enormous hazard that could fuel a firestorm and devastate our communities.
1 Weber, Jason and Neill, Christie. “2017 Marin County Unit Strategic Fire Plan & Community Wildfire Protection Plan
(CWPP)”, Section 1.0. Accessed 12 Sept. 2018.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 4 of 37
View from Mt. Tamalpais in days gone by (top) and today 2019. (Bottom photo: Eileen Alexander)
Overgrown vegetation also threatens Marin’s roads and evacuation routes. It narrows these
escape routes, many of which will be impassable in a wildfire. As happened in Paradise,
panicked Marin residents may try to flee only to find the roads impeded by burning vegetation,
fallen trees, downed power lines, and stalled cars with melting engine blocks.2
2 St. John, Page, Serna, Joseph, and Lin II, Rong-Gong. “Here’s how Paradise ignored warnings and became a
Deathtrap.” LA Times. 30 Dec. 2018.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 5 of 37
Burned Cars and Melted Aluminum from Engine Block Caused by Extreme Heat in Camp Fire, November 2018. (Jane
Tyska/Bay Area News Group) The Mercury News. Published Nov. 13, 2018.
Overhanging trees, thick underbrush, and vegetation that have grown too close to structures also
pose serious threats. First responders will bypass evacuated homes that are overgrown by
vegetation. Instead, they will move on to homes that have defensible space rather than attempt to
save a structure that has none.
Facts:
1. The federal government and the State of California own thousands of acres of ungroomed open
space in the county.
2. The Marin Municipal Water District owns approximately 21,500 acres of wildland3 and has been
clearing only 30 acres per year.4
3. Marin County Open Space District owns approximately 16,000 acres of wildland, but only about
10% are managed to reduce fire hazard annually.5
4. According to the Marin County Assessor’s Office, approximately 4,400 vacant lots are in the
county. They are usually not well maintained, or maintained at all, and as a result are dangerously
overgrown, often with pyrophytic (fire prone) plants.
5. The vegetation management policies and practices by the county fire departments and districts are
not uniform.
3 “About MMWD,” Marin Municipal Water District. Accessed on 14 Mar. 2018.
4 Spotswood, Dick. “Challenge becomes clear in visit to MMWD watershed.” Marin Independent Journal. 25 Sept. 2018.
5 Korton, Max. “2016-17 Annual Report.” Marin County Parks and Open Space. p. 3. Accessed 6 Mar. 2019.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 6 of 37
6. The number of dedicated vegetation inspectors, who are also trained firefighters, varies
significantly from one department to another. For example, the largest fire department, the
County of Marin, has two chief officers, two captains, two part-time inspectors, and four to six
seasonal defensible space inspectors. In contrast, many smaller departments cannot dedicate even
a single firefighter to full-time inspection duties.
7. The number and frequency of vegetation/defensible space inspections vary significantly among
jurisdictions.
8. Jurisdictions differ regarding the vegetation that is or should be banned. For example, San Rafael
requires but fails to enforce the removal of juniper and bamboo as they are considered pyrophytic
plants, but most cities and towns have no list of prohibited plants.
9. In residential communities, the lack of vegetation inspectors requires some departments to
conduct only “windshield” inspections, where engine crews drive through neighborhoods looking
for obvious violations that can be seen from the street, often missing hidden hazardous
conditions.
10. Where hazardous conditions are observed and corrective notices are issued, jurisdictions rarely
have the resources to follow-up and confirm the violations have been remedied.
11. The formal procedures to take action against code violators vary from one jurisdiction to another
and none provide a streamlined process that will accomplish corrective actions in a timely
manner.
12. Vegetation management is a repetitive task that needs to be performed at least annually; it
requires clearing underbrush, mowing grass, limbing-up trees and disposing of dead matter.
Two charts summarizing current vegetation management practices in all of Marin’s fire
jurisdictions are attached as Appendix A.
Educating the Public
Another essential issue is education of the public. To reach everyone in every neighborhood the
number of Firewise Communities should be expanded through the efforts of Firewise USA™
and FIRESafe Marin. These two organizations support Marin County neighborhoods to reduce
wildfire risks by educating and motivating citizens to mitigate hazards and prepare for a wildfire
disaster.
Firewise Communities are neighborhood groups certified by Firewise USA, a national
organization that teaches people about the risk of wildfire and encourages neighbors to take
immediate action to protect their homes and improve their safety through neighborhood-wide
collaboration. Communities develop plans that guide their risk reduction activities and develop
collaborative efforts for neighbors to work toward building a safer place to live. Marin already
has over 30 Firewise Communities.
FIRESafe Marin is a local non-profit information organization dedicated to wildfire risk
prevention and increasing fire-safety awareness in Marin County. This organization provides
education, resources, tools, and on-going support for neighborhoods to form Firewise
Communities.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 7 of 37
FIRESafe Marin also provides information and literature to the Fire in Marin! program that is
held each wildfire season. Only a single volunteer delivers the Fire in Marin! program thereby
limiting the number of sessions and attendees. In addition, there are a number of emergency
preparedness programs offered, most of which cover all disasters, not exclusively wildfire. These
are delivered by volunteers or fire departments. Most public education sessions have been
notable for the predominance of older residents and the paucity of parents of young children.
Even if all local fire jurisdictions in Marin were to act together, more personnel would be needed
to make sure everyone gets the message and gets prepared. This must be done at a grass roots
level. Marin Firewise Communities have shown that they can generate much more neighborhood
participation and preparation than public agencies are able to do. In order to involve all
neighborhoods, FIRESafe Marin needs to expand its staff and activities from its one current part-
time employee.
Education of the public is essential to enable Marin residents to reduce damages and destruction,
to escape wildfire, and to survive. Educating and informing the public requires complete
disclosure. This includes posting all possible evacuation routes and other exits including stairs,
paths, fire roads and shortcuts. It also includes making all appropriate geographic information
system maps easily understandable so residents can see and evaluate their own individual
properties and situations regardless of possible commercial misuse by the insurance industry or
others. By providing all information, emergency planners will enable people to make the best
decisions for their own safety and survival because people cannot rely on being protected and
rescued in a large emergency.
Wildfire is Coming: Are We Ready?
Ultimately, to be prepared for wildfire, everyone must take responsibility for their own property
and join their neighbors to build strong, fire resistant communities. We must shake off apathy,
get informed, and act.
Citizens have to ask themselves, “Am I ready and do I know what actions to take?”
For example, have I...
1. Created defensible space around my home?
2. Hardened my home against ember showers?
3. Discussed evacuation plans with my family?
4. Identified two exit routes from my neighborhood?
5. Stocked emergency supplies to last 72 hours?
6. Signed up for all emergency alerts?
7. Packed a go-bag?
If the answer to any of these questions is no, our safety authorities have failed to meet their
obligation to educate and convince the public, or our citizens have failed to incorporate their
message. Prompt action is needed while there still is time to prepare.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 8 of 37
Facts:
1. Public education on wildfire preparedness is delivered inconsistently via websites, email, and in
person in neighborhoods, homes, pop-up meetings, and classes.
2. County wildfire education policies are not consistent across towns/cities nor is the application of
those policies.
3. Marin has 30 plus Firewise Communities which encourage neighbors to help neighbors to prepare
for emergencies.
4. Only about 10% of Marin residents are signed up for Alert Marin.
5. Only a small percentage of Marin’s citizens have attended a wildfire safety preparation meeting.
6. FIRESafe Marin has only one part-time employee to educate the entire county.
7. Emergency preparedness information is occasionally offered by CERT, Get Ready Novato,
Neighborhood Response Groups, Fire in Marin!, FIRESafe Marin, FireWise Communities and
fire departments.
8. There are no other countywide government sponsored programs that cover wildfire preparation.
9. Few residents take advantage of home visits provided by fire departments to assess their
properties’ vegetation and fire hazards.
Two charts summarizing current programs to educate the public in the county are attached as
Appendix B.
Alerts
When a wildfire starts, emergency managers implement a number of alert systems to protect the
public. It is critical that those in the path of a deadly wildfire receive accurate and timely
information. The effectiveness of these warnings depends on the reliability of all alert system
technologies and their rapid implementation through the emergency command structure.
Alert Technologies and their Weaknesses
Marin County has overlapping alert systems, which can be implemented for emergency events.
Such redundancy is important as no single system will reach all residents at all times. Emergency
managers use the Emergency Alert System, Wireless Emergency Alerts, Alert Marin, Nixle and,
in some fire districts, sirens. In addition, emergency services use television and radio bulletins,
and social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, and Instagram to inform the public. As a
last resort, law enforcement personnel and fire fighters may go door to door or use loud speakers
to deliver evacuation orders.
Emergency Alert System is used for catastrophic events. It is a national warning system,
but state and local authorities can use it to deliver local emergency information. It reaches
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 9 of 37
the public via broadcast, cable, satellite, and wired communications pathways. However,
if power is lost or the devices are switched off, the alert fails.
Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) is a system that employs “push notification’’ alerts.
It reaches mobile devices by geographically targeting cell towers in a certain area. It
sends text-like messages that warn of imminent threats to safety in the area. WEA does
not require telephone subscribers to sign-up.
The disadvantage of the WEA system is that it is geographically imprecise. The message
can “bleed over” to those who drive in and out of a cell tower’s range so it can reach
more people than the intended recipients of the warning or evacuation order. Because of
this, emergency officials hesitate to use it, as was the case in both the Tubbs Fire in 2017
and, again, in the Camp Fire in 2018. Recent history has shown that early use of WEA
might be less dangerous, even if too many people are notified, than the risk of using it too
late. Despite its over-reach, it offers at least a chance of escape to those in danger. If
WEA is used too early and too many people receive an evacuation notice, at worst, it will
provide a real-time, full scale evacuation drill for those involved even though it might
strain evacuation routes.
Additionally, cell tower locations are proprietary information and therefore emergency
officials cannot be sure when sending out a WEA that the information will be transmitted
to exactly the right geographic location. Emergency planners discovered that in the East
Bay, an emergency alert was issued to a specific location and after the event it was
revealed that the alert had not gone through because no cell towers were in the targeted
geographic area. Further, alerts only reach WEA compatible cell phones that are turned
on, that are within range of an active cell tower, and whose wireless provider participates
in WEA.
Significantly, in the context of wildfires, WEA are also vulnerable to failure because if
cell towers and power lines are destroyed, phone contact will be lost, and alerts will fail.
Alert Marin is the most precise way to target those populations that need to be warned of
danger. It is considered to be the first-tier emergency notification system for the county.
It reaches land lines, and for those who register, cell phones, email, and VOIP (Voice
Over Internet Protocol) connections. Alerts are sent to individuals who are registered to
specific postal addresses and contain vital, but short, instructions such as shelter in place,
prepare to evacuate, or evacuate now. These directives remain in effect until the situation
changes. Alert Marin keeps leaving messages until the recipient responds.
Alert Marin is designed to provide messages to the public using pre-written templates, so
its directives are terse, inflexible, and not explanatory. Consequently, after a recent fire
event on Mt. Barnabe in Marin, fire officials were told that some recipients were
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 10 of 37
confused because the information conveyed was so brief or not updated as the situation
unfolded.
Alert Marin is an opt-in service that only reaches those who have signed up. The fact that
it is not opt-out is a significant weakness. The Marin Office of Emergency Services
(OES) estimates that only about 10% of Marin residents are registered with Alert Marin.
In addition, like WEA, Alert Marin is vulnerable to cell tower damage and therefore its
communications may fail to reach people in the path of danger.
Nixle sends out a text messages to smartphones. It reaches an entire zip code. Messages
are sent from different safety authorities to inform the public of local conditions such as
roadwork, accidents, weather, and other events. Emergency officials find Nixle a useful
and flexible means of transmitting warnings and updates in dynamic situations. It is hard
to track how many people subscribe to Nixle because it is a zip code-based registration
system with multiple zip codes easily added by one phone subscriber. Emergency
planners believe that a low percentage of Marin’s residents are signed up for Nixle.
A disadvantage of the Nixle system is that people might develop “Nixle fatigue.” They
may stop reading their texts because Nixle is used by so many different agencies and
alerts are sent so frequently, including situations that they don’t consider dangerous or
relevant.
Another disadvantage is that Nixle, as with Alert Marin, is an opt-in system and that it is
vulnerable to failure when communications systems are overwhelmed or when cell
towers go down.
Sirens do not depend on wireless technology and therefore they are less likely to fail at
the same time than other alert systems. Their disadvantages are that sirens cannot be
heard everywhere or by all people and they do not convey specific information unless
they have a voice communication system attached such as a Long Range Acoustic Device
(LRAD).
Social media are useful but also subject to cell tower failure. Also, social media cannot
reach those who are not online.
Radio and TV bulletins are reliable because they are independent of cell towers and
they operate on different frequencies in the wireless spectrum. Radio and TV, however,
require power and access to equipment. To serve as a reliable alert system such devices
must be on at all times.
Megaphones are used when all else fails. Police and firefighters drive through
neighborhoods to warn residents with loud speakers and horns. They also may knock on
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 11 of 37
doors to announce an evacuation. While these methods are highly effective, they are time
consuming, dangerous, waste skilled manpower and provide the least amount of advance
notice.
Woody Baker-Cohn, Emergency Services Coordinator, Marin County Sheriff's Office of Emergency Services
Having multiple alert systems is essential to reach the greatest number of residents who are in the
path of fire danger. No single system is adequate because at some point, each is vulnerable to
failure when put to the test. However, designing a warning system that requires the public to
sign-up and then failing to advertise adequately its existence, fails to meet even minimum
standards of emergency preparedness and common sense.
Evacuations
Having alerted the public to danger, the next step is to evacuate large groups away from an
oncoming wildfire. Evacuations will be difficult; they have not been well planned or practiced.
Evacuations in Marin will be chaotic, and could be deadly, during a wildfire.
Evacuation Dangers and Concerns
The geography of Marin County is varied and most of the county is open space, much of which
has become dangerously overgrown. The majority of Marin’s population is concentrated along
the Highway 101 corridor. Access from residential neighborhoods to the freeway is usually
crowded, through narrow corridors, and often deliberately constricted. Some smaller
communities in West Marin are situated along Highway 1, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, and
Novato Boulevard, the county’s main east/west routes. These roads, and Highway 37, would be
main evacuation routes to or from Highway 101 to escape a wildfire. None of these arteries is
designed to accommodate mass evacuations.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 12 of 37
About 69,000 homes in Marin are in the WUI.6 Due to surrounding vegetation and proximity to
wildlands these areas are considered to be at greater risk of wildfires. In the WUI, many
residential communities are in steep, box canyons with only one entry or exit road. Houses built
on hills are frequently connected to safety only by narrow, winding roads that lack shoulders and
have a steep drop to one side. Roads in these areas also snake through hills covered by dense
vegetation. The topography and overgrown vegetation of the county makes us vulnerable to
catastrophic evacuation failures.
Indeed, all areas in Marin are vulnerable to wildfire and evacuation failure no matter whether
they are situated inside or outside of the WUI. Those shown on the county’s fire hazard severity
zone maps to be located in low fire risk areas are also vulnerable.7 Ember showers and fire
tornadoes are frightening characteristics of recent, devastating fires. In wind driven wildfires,
embers travel miles ahead of the flame front, igniting new fires. For example, Coffey Park in
Santa Rosa is not in the WUI; it abuts Highway 101 and was totally destroyed by the Tubbs Fire.
In fact, fire authorities are beginning to consider hazard projection maps misleading because
people rely on them mistakenly believing that they are safe.8 No neighborhood can consider
itself immune to the ravages of wildfire and difficulties in evacuating.
Evacuations in the Camp Fire proved deadly. Poor vegetation management on both sides of the
evacuation routes created fuel loads that sent temperatures to over 1500 degrees. This intense
heat melted tires and wheel rims, and many newer cars simply ceased to operate when their air
intake temperature sensors detected extreme heat. Roads were blocked with abandoned cars,
fallen trees and downed power lines, which led to panic -- creating a lethally dangerous situation
for those attempting to escape the fire. A number of people died in their cars while attempting to
evacuate.9
6 “Updated Wildfire Protection Plan OK’d by Board.” County of Marin. Accessed on 22 Feb. 2019.
7 “Wildland Hazard & Building Codes: Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps.” Cal Fire. Accessed on 13 Mar. 2019.
8 Pera, Matthew. “Marin firefighters uneasy about state’s risk maps.” Marin Independent Journal. 6 Jan. 2019.
9 Krieger, Lisa and Debolt, David. “Camp Fire: Paradise residents say they received no mass cellphone alerts to evacuate, or to
warn of fires - Residents learned late of the danger --then faced gridlock.” The Mercury News. Nov.18, 2018.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 13 of 37
Burned Cars and Downed Power Lines Block Pearson Road in Paradise, California, on Saturday, Nov. 10, 2018. (Jane Tyska/Bay
Area News Group) San Jose Mercury News, November 17, 2018.
The Grand Jury visited Paradise in January 2019 to view the disaster. See Appendix F to this
report, which compares Paradise’s wildfire preparedness before the Camp Fire with Marin’s
current state of preparedness.
Marin County has failed to manage its vegetation adequately and its evacuation routes are
narrow and overgrown. The public is not sufficiently prepared or drilled in evacuation
procedures and first responders cannot handle evacuation events with the speed and scale
required by the new, routinely occurring megafires. Even when drills are practiced, they occur on
a small scale, using unblocked roads, with clear information and no panic (See Appendix E).
The mass movement of populations in an unpredictable, dynamic emergency needs meticulous
planning. Fire departments work with law enforcement to manage evacuations and neither may
be able to muster sufficient personnel to handle it.
The staffing of emergency personnel in Marin is a matter of concern. According to the Grand
Jury report in 2011, only 20-30% of first responders live in the county.10 That number is likely to
be even lower now. Considering how fast a wildfire travels and how few police and firefighters
would be on duty to handle a sudden threat, the county’s reliance on a prompt response from
non-resident, reserve and off-duty personnel is unrealistic. They could be delayed for hours
because of road damage or congestion, if they even arrive at all.
10 “Disaster Preparedness in Marin: Are You Ready?.” Marin County Civil Grand Jury. 21 June 2011, p.1.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 14 of 37
Marin’s narrow roads cannot all be rebuilt, but existing, wider roads and those that are major
evacuation routes should not be narrowed or impeded. Some roads now have obstacles such as
concrete medians, sidewalk bump-outs, lane reductions, speed bumps and other “traffic calming”
techniques, which will significantly hinder evacuations. The lethal danger these obstacles create
outweighs the benefit a community achieves by reducing the “expressway feeling” that busy
roads give to a pleasant town. The possibility of a mass evacuation now rises to a significant
daily risk in the fire season; constricting already inadequate roads seems reckless.
Plans to ease the flow of traffic along existing evacuation routes are far from ready. The use of
traffic-light sequencing which could be used to improve the speed and flow of traffic along
evacuation routes such as Sir Francis Drake Boulevard are being discussed, but implementation
is years away. Other roads that might be suitable for this life-saving innovation have not yet been
considered.
Additionally, contraflow arrangements, making two-way roads into one-way thoroughfares, is
essential to move people more swiftly. Contraflow can increase the directional capacity of a
roadway without the time or cost required to construct additional lanes. However, contraflow
procedures have not yet been developed or tested for the county’s main evacuation routes.
No traffic studies have been performed to determine how long a mass evacuation would take for
an entire community. Consequently, comparing the time a mass evacuation on available exit
roads would take with the duration of an evacuation on contraflow routes and routes with
sequenced traffic lights, has not been considered in evacuation planning. These omissions put the
public at grave risk. They will make mass evacuations along Marin’s inadequate roads a
predictably terrifying, if not deadly, event.
Use of Transit in Evacuations
Finding that plans for residents to evacuate in their own vehicles down Marin’s narrow roads has
not been adequately addressed, the Grand Jury examined the county’s plans to use public transit
to ease congestion along routes that cannot or will not be improved, straightened or enlarged.
A vital part of evacuation planning in Marin County should involve the participation of public
transit. In the Tubbs fire, a memory care facility was evacuated by bus drivers who, on their own
initiative, drove to the facility and rescued the residents.11
Public transit is an underused resource for evacuations. It must be included in emergency
planning because buses can carry numerous passengers who otherwise might be trapped. Marin
residents who do not have cars cannot simply drive away from a wildfire, yet planners have not
identified how many non-drivers would need rescue.
11 McCallum, Kevin. “Santa Rosa bus video shows harrowing Tubbs fire rescue.” Santa Rosa Press Democrat. 5 Jun. 2018.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 15 of 37
A major national report by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies found
that transit should be involved in both planning and implementation procedures of an emergency
evacuation. It specified that “transit agencies should be part of preparedness plans and
represented in the emergency command structure. They can also play a vital role during the
response phase, in both helping to evacuate those without access to a private vehicle and
bringing emergency responders and equipment to the incident site.”12
Additionally, other emergency transportation preparedness studies reviewed by the Grand Jury
make it clear that for an orderly evacuation, large populations cannot be moved without transit
being fully represented in the chain of command in an emergency operations center (EOC).13 14
In Marin’s EOC, transit is only represented by Marin Transit. Golden Gate Transit emergency
managers, SMART representatives, Whistlestop, Marin Airporter and ferry operators do not have
a seat in the room. The current arrangement is that Marin Transit will keep Golden Gate Transit
and the other transit agencies informed and on standby. This places most transit agencies too far
from the emergency command structure in the operations center and will lead to
unnecessary delays as information has to be relayed to and from these other agencies before any
assets can be deployed.
These emergency transportation studies indicate that an evacuation using public transit requires
real-time communication between transit operators and emergency managers prior to and during
emergency evacuations. This entails integration of communications within a transit system,
among different transit agencies and between transit and other governmental safety partners.
Currently, Marin’s transit communications fail to meet these standards.
Transit communications are not properly integrated into the Marin Emergency Radio Authority
(MERA), a multi-agency communications system. In 2014, a special parcel tax was passed to
fund MERA’s Next Generation radio equipment, a system that was intended to improve its
interoperability and integrate emergency communications services into a unified system. Despite
this, units in the field of both Golden Gate Transit and Marin Transit still cannot communicate
directly with each other, with other transit agencies or with other mutual aid safety partners and
first responders to coordinate emergency activities because the new equipment has not yet been
installed. It is expected that the new system will be up and running by 2023. This failure impedes
the county’s ability to deploy transit services and help evacuate large populations in an
emergency.
Judged on both criteria of integration with the command structure and fully integrated
communications, transit is an underused resource of evacuation preparedness in Marin.
12 The Role of Transit in Emergency Evacuation, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies Special Report 294.
Transportation Research Board 2008. p.3.
13 Schwarz, Michael A. and Litman, Todd A. “Evacuation Station: The use of Public Transportation in Emergency Management
Planning.” ITE Journal on the Web. Jan. 2008.
14 Scanlon, J. “Transportation In Emergencies: An Often Neglected Story.” Disaster Prevention and Management. Vol. 12, No. 5
2003.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 16 of 37
Impediments to Progress
Much could be done to greatly improve Marin’s wildfire preparedness in all the areas mentioned
above were it not for public and private inertia, governmental distrust of the public, and instances
of bureaucratic complacency. In the face of wildfires’ unprecedented threat, our political culture
must change. We must prioritize public safety now. We need to adopt a new wildfire safety
ethic.
In the last twenty years, the Marin County Civil Grand Jury has issued five reports on the
dangers of wildfire and the importance of being prepared; the most recent was released in 2013.
County elected officials overseeing multiple departments and agencies have been required to
read and respond to the reports’ recommendations. Although summaries have been published in
the Marin Independent Journal and other publications, not enough has been done publicly or
privately to improve countywide preparedness.
In some cases, local government does not trust the public. It “spins” information to avoid an
adverse public response. Government officials and first responders would like the public to
believe that all evacuation routes have been cleared of roadside vegetation, all designated access
and egress roads are accessible and passable, and that traffic congestion can be handled by police
officers who will be in place at critical intersections. The public would be mistaken to believe
this.
Emergency planners in many jurisdictions do not publicize all possible evacuation routes and
other exits including stairs, paths, fire roads and shortcuts because they think that wildfires are
too dynamic and unpredictable. They fear that residents will focus on a predetermined route even
though changing conditions might make that route unfeasible. Withholding information prevents
people from planning ahead for their own evacuation or improvising as circumstances change. It
is precisely the unpredictability of wildfire that makes it essential that all possible escape routes
be known well in advance. Only if they understand all the options can residents make well-
reasoned decisions in unforeseen circumstances. The public needs to be protected from wildfire,
not from knowledge.
Studies have shown that to build public trust, those in authority positions must be open.15 Trust
affects evacuation behavior in emergency situations and is vital to avoid panic. To gain the
public’s trust, emergency planners must trust the public, keep them fully informed and explain the
limits of their ability to help the public in an emergenc y. Governments must make it clear that
alerts might fail and evacuations, if possible at all, will be dangerous, unpredictable and slow. If
the public understands that nothing is being hidden, they will make preparations for themselves,
trust that the information provided to them is both accurate and as complete as possible and
respond to an emergency order without delay or panic.
15 Drury, John and Cocking, Chris “The Mass Psychology of Disasters and Emergency Evacuations: A Research Report and
Implications for Practice” Department of Psychology. University of Sussex. March 2007.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 17 of 37
The Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) is an example of bureaucratic complacency and
evasion of responsibility. TAM’s job is to oversee the use of its 2004 sales tax money with a
“single goal: [i]mprove mobility and reduce local congestion for everyone who lives or works in
Marin County by providing a variety of high quality transportation options designed to meet
local needs.” Also, improving Marin’s roads and preventing evacuation congestion fits squarely
with the provisions of TAM’s new 2018 Expenditure Plan which requires it to spend Measure
AA dollars to, among other things, “[m]aintain, improve, and manage Marin County’s local
transportation infrastructure, including roads … to create a well-maintained and resilient
transportation system” and to “[m]aintain and expand local transit services.”16 Despite this, TAM
has not involved itself in planning for mass evacuations, or to improve the county’s roads,
evacuation routes, and other emergency infrastructure for large scale emergencies. The Grand
Jury was unable to determine why this is so since TAM’s authorizing legislation allows it to
perform these functions.17 18
Further, citing concerns about liability, TAM has been resistant to even convening a discussion
to address evacuation congestion planning. Although it administers a “Safe Routes to School”
program to reduce congestion, TAM claims that making routes safe from fire is not within its
power or responsibility. Would not addressing evacuation planning and procedures “improve
mobility and reduce congestion” for Marin residents and workers escaping wildfire?
Bureaucratic inertia and the shirking of responsibility are dangerous to everyone.
Another instance of potentially devastating complacency concerns the fact that both Alert Marin
and Nixle are opt-in. Having estimated that only about 10% of Marin residents are registered
with Alert Marin, and most likely the same with Nixle, the OES and other county officials should
not be content with this dismal number. To date, little effort has gone into increasing registration
with a public information campaign: no media blitz, bus advertisements, billboards, mailers or
public service announcements. The fact that the vast majority of the county cannot be reached by
its two most important warning systems should be of urgent concern.
However, the Grand Jury considers that a public information campaign, even if implemented,
would still be inadequate for public safety. The OES should facilitate the inclusion of all Marin
citizens into Alert Marin and Nixle to make them opt-out systems. Both should have a database
containing residents’ contact information. This information can be obtained from a variety of
sources. Let those with privacy concerns opt-out. This is a matter of life or death for the ninety
percent of Marin residents who are not registered.
County and local governments cannot afford to manage vegetation. Property owners must be
responsible for doing much of the work. Despite this, county and local officials have made little
effort to impress upon property owners that their safety depends on individual action. Few
16 “Transportation Authority of Marin 2018 Final Expenditure Plan.” Accessed on 15 Mar. 2019.
17 “California Public Utilities Code”, Division 19, Chapters.1-6, Sections 180000-180264.
18 Resolution No. 2004-21. Marin County Board of Supervisors. 2 Mar. 2004.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 18 of 37
programs or subsidies are offered. Our local politicians reliance on public participation without
adequate public outreach and education is a poor response to mitigating a significant hazard.
This slipshod approach to public safety seems to rely more upon the hope for good luck than it
does on rigorous planning. Appendix E to this report lists what a former Federal Emergency
Management Agency Administrator describes as the seven deadly sins of emergency
management - each one can be found in Marin’s plans. Why do we have inconsistent vegetation
management, inefficient fire code enforcement procedures, and spotty public education? Where
are our best thinkers and planners? What is every government agency doing to protect the public
from the catastrophic dangers we now confront? Our priorities and attention are elsewhere.
Despite the laudable efforts of Marin’s fire chiefs to create a bold new approach to pre-ignition
and pre-suppression issues, other entities such as city councils, transportation agencies,
environmental groups, regional/urban planners, and land-use activists are not addressing the
wildfire risks that climate change has brought to our daily lives. Environmental activists
discourage vegetation removal and controlled burns, elected officials allow development in the
WUI and choke evacuation routes with obstacles.
These policies reflect an old reality and old thinking. The environment, housing, and traffic
calming efforts are important, but the consequences of these policies are not being reviewed or
modified to address the new hazards created by wildfire. Wildfires ravage the environment; they
create massive air quality issues, toxic waste, mass destruction, and most importantly, they cause
death. Whether through lethargy, indifference or inflexible thinking, many policy makers,
emergency planners, and government agencies do not prioritize wildfire safety, nor do they seem
willing or able to act nimbly to forestall an impending disaster.
Two charts summarizing current countywide evacuation and alerts issues are attached as
Appendix C.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 19 of 37
Air Quality During the Camp Fire. Marin Independent Journal dated November 17, 2018.
(Risberg, Eric. Associated Press)
CONCLUSION
Proposed Umbrella Entity
In response to its pre-ignition and pre-suppression planning concerns, the Grand Jury proposes
the creation of a countywide entity whose purpose would be to coordinate fire preparedness
throughout the county regardless of the political jurisdiction. This proposed umbrella entity (the
“Entity”) would not propose to interfere with actual fire-fighting issues nor would it attempt a
countywide consolidation of fire departments or districts. Its mission would be to focus on pre-
ignition and pre-suppression issues only.
Proposed Powers
The countywide Entity would have authority to investigate, create, propose, and carry out
programs and processes in the following areas:
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 20 of 37
1. Vegetation management: Create a countywide group of at least 30 plus full-time vegetation
management inspectors with authority granted by each constituent jurisdiction to inspect property
throughout the county regardless of the city/town or county where the property is located. The
inspectors would be authorized to issue citations to enforce countywide protocols established by
best practices for safe vegetation management. The Entity would create uniform enforcement of
vegetation management citations as well as develop an expedited legal process akin to the process
currently used in civil courts for evictions. This would ensure prompt compliance with citations.
If the creation of this accelerated enforcement procedure requires state legislative action, the
Entity should lobby the California legislature for these changes.
2. Fuel Reduction Crews: Create sufficient fire/fuels crews whose sole responsibilities would be to
work on reducing the fuel load starting with the highest fire risk areas.
3. Education: Engage in public outreach and education either through dedicated staff or by
subcontracting with FIRESafe Marin.
4. Alerts and Evacuations: Develop countywide best practice policies for alert notification systems
and evacuation route planning, including the possible use of new technology, such as the LRAD
system, as well as working with public transit agencies to develop emergency response protocols,
evacuations, drills and alerts.
5. Public Participation: Create programs to encourage fuel reduction work by citizens on their own
properties as well as develop funding programs either by the Entity or through grants from other
sources to help the elderly, those with access and functional needs, and low-income residents.
Suggested Structure
The Grand Jury proposes that the Entity be a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). It should include
every special fire district, every city and town, Marin County Fire Department, Marin Municipal
Water District (MMWD) and Parks and Open Space. See Appendix D for a list of those that
should be members of the Entity.
Although the fire chiefs and city/town managers in the county have come together to formulate a
joint community-wide response to all the major wildfire issues, their working group is an
informal structure. This group will not be able to fully implement and enforce all of the programs
and protocols necessary to make Marin firesafe and prevent individual jurisdictions from
adopting their own practices. As fire knows no jurisdictional boundaries, a countywide JPA must
be formed to unify wildfire preparation.
Funding
Funding for pre-ignition and pre-suppression projects is the main obstacle cited by all
government agencies and fire districts. Not only do government entities claim that there are no
excess funds in their budgets, individual fire departments and special fire districts also claim that
they do not have enough money to undertake the types of pre-ignition and pre-suppression
proposals cited in this report. It is imperative to solve this critical issue.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 21 of 37
Two practical methods for funding the Entity are (1) a countywide parcel tax or (2) a countywide
sales tax:
1. Parcel Tax: According to the Assessor’s office there are approximately 90,000 taxable parcels in
Marin County not counting the extensive holdings under control of the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area, MMWD or Marin County Parks. Thus, any parcel tax paid would have to be
high enough to fund projects on these tax-exempt lands. In order to be effective, each jurisdiction
would have to pass exactly the same parcel tax measure for the same amount at the same time.
Besides the difficulty of having 11 cities and towns as well as the county coordinate such a
process, there are a number of special fire districts in the county that would also have to be
involved in the drafting and implementation of this process. If just one jurisdiction fails to
cooperate with this proposal, the benefit of having a countywide plan to deal with wildfire
preparedness would fail. Based on these very real political issues, the Grand Jury does not
recommend a parcel tax as the best method to fund the Entity.
2. Sales Tax: The best way to fund the Entity is to authorize a countywide quarter cent sales tax.
Under state law, the sales tax is 6% plus an additional mandatory 1.25% for local jurisdictions for
a total of 7.25%. State law allows local jurisdictions to assess up to an additional 2% sales tax
with voter approval. The 7.25% coupled with the 2% maximum means that the maximum sales
tax could be 9.25%. However, the state legislature routinely allows local entities to exceed the 2%
cap by simply passing a statute to that effect. For example, all of Los Angeles County, including
its 16 cities, plus an additional seven cities in Northern California have requested and been
granted the right to exceed the 2% limit.
Because of the 2% cap, a number of local officials have resisted putting this final ¼ cent tax
before the voters. However, only four jurisdictions currently have actual combined sales tax rates
at the 9% level. The remaining eight jurisdictions could easily add this ¼ cent and still not hit the
2% ceiling. Each jurisdiction’s current sales tax is attached as Appendix G. As for the four
jurisdictions that would hit the 9.25% maximum, they would be likely to get a state exemption
should the need arise in the future.
Finally, the most important reason for recommending a ¼ cent sales tax as a funding mechanism
is that there need be only one enabling statute which can be placed directly on the ballot by the
Marin County Board of Supervisors with the agreement of all the political jurisdictions. Marin
voters used this process in November 2018 to continue a ½ cent sales tax for transportation
improvements.
The time has come to use the final ¼ cent sales tax for our most pressing countywide issue,
wildfire. If not now, when? If not for this, then for what? What could be more important than
saving lives? If the citizens of Marin are given a chance to make their county as safe as possible
from wildfires, passing this sales tax measure should not be a problem. It will provide a steady
source of revenue so that the local governments and special fire districts will not have to tap into
their budgets. As part of this ballot measure, a citizen oversight committee should be created to
make sure that the funds collected are used solely for the mission of the Entity.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 22 of 37
Local Interests Must Be Subsumed Into A Countywide Organization
This proposal is revolutionary for Marin. It will require every government entity and every
special fire district to become a member. The only way to make Marin safer is for the entire
county to work together and not allow local politics to torpedo this innovative proposal.
A number of critical issues prevent Marin from being fire safe. Current vegetation management
policies, alert systems and evacuation planning, as well as current public education efforts are
insufficient to make Marin pre-ignition and pre-suppression fire safe. The most crucial issue is
the political will to create this countywide agency with such broad authority.
The citizens of Marin must choose between safety and vegetation aesthetics.
The creation of this Entity allows for necessary actions to be developed and implemented for all
pre-ignition and pre-suppression matters. The Entity will ensure that the tax funds are used solely
for wildfire preparedness and not for other environmental priorities. It also does not impinge on
local sovereignty except where necessary to create countywide best practices. Without the Entity,
local jurisdictions have neither the will nor the money to undertake such sweeping measures.
Wildfires do not respect jurisdictional boundaries. Marin is known for providing mutual aid and
cooperation among its professional firefighting agencies. What is missing are countywide,
coordinated, science-based, pre-ignition and pre-suppression policies and procedures. This
recommendation solves that issue.
FINDINGS — Vegetation
F1. Existing vegetation management codes are both inconsistent and inconsistently enforced.
F2. There are not enough trained vegetation inspectors or fuel reduction crews.
F3. Current vegetation enforcement procedures are slow, difficult and expensive.
F4. Government agencies and safety authorities cannot currently manage vegetation on
public lands.
F5. All property owners are responsible for vegetation management on their property, yet
they are not sufficiently educated about vegetation management and many do not have
the physical and financial resources to create defensible space.
FINDINGS — Education of the Public
F6. Wildfire preparedness education is inconsistent and fails to reach most citizens,
especially parents of young children.
F7. The most effective method of education is person to person in neighborhoods.
F8. Although Marin has 30 plus Firewise neighborhoods, the most in California, they only
cover a small percentage of population and land.
F9. Sufficient public funds have not been provided to sustain comprehensive wildfire
preparedness education.
F10. Educating the public requires a different set of skills than firefighters usually have.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 23 of 37
FINDINGS — Alerts
F11. Any hesitation to use the WEA system can be deadly even if its alerts might reach people
outside of its intended target zone.
F12. Alert Marin sends the most accurately targeted warnings to endangered populations, but
it reaches too few residents because it is not well publicized. Both Alert Marin and Nixle
require opt-in registration, a serious design flaw.
F13. Sirens could be a useful and reliable warning system if their numbers and locations were
increased to broaden their reach and if they were enhanced with a customized message
through LRAD.
FINDINGS — Evacuations
F14. In the WUI and in many town centers, infrastructure and roads are inadequate for mass
evacuations.
F15. Evacuation routes are dangerously overgrown with vegetation and many evacuation
routes are too narrow to allow safe passage in an emergency.
F16. Emergency planners often do not publicize evacuation routes due to their mistrust of the
public.
F17. Town councils, planners, and public works officials have not addressed traffic choke
points and, in some instances, they have created obstacles to traffic flow by the
installation of concrete medians, bumpouts, curbs, speed bumps, and lane reductions.
F18. No studies have been performed to determine how long it would take to evacuate entire
communities via existing evacuation corridors.
F19. The implementation of traffic-light sequencing and coordination to allow mass egress,
and the conversion of two-way roads into one-way evacuation routes to ease traffic
congestion, are dangerously delayed and years away from being implemented.
F20. Public transit is a neglected asset of emergency response preparedness: all operators
except one transit agency are left out of the command structure and none is integrated
into the emergency radio communication system MERA.
F21. A bureaucratic culture of complacency and inertia exists in Marin. Government often
fails to act quickly to repair known gaps in emergency preparedness, to think flexibly,
and to prioritize safety in its planning and policies.
FINDINGS — Umbrella
F22. No countywide comprehensive, coordinated policies have been made and no funds have
been allocated to prepare for wildfires.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 24 of 37
RECOMMENDATIONS — Vegetation
R1. Create a comprehensive, countywide vegetation management plan that includes
vegetation along evacuation routes, a campaign to mobilize public participation, and low-
income subsidies.
R2. Hire at least 30 new civilian vegetation inspectors and at least eight fire/fuels crews
focused on fuel reduction in the high risk areas of the county, including federal, state and
local public lands.
R3. Develop and implement a fast, streamlined procedure to enforce vegetation citations.
RECOMMENDATIONS — Education
R4. Adopt and deliver a comprehensive education program focused on action for all residents
of Marin on a regular schedule by a team of expert trainers.
R5. Promote the creation of Firewise Communities in every neighborhood b y all local
jurisdictions.
R6. Employ individuals with skills in public speaking, teaching, curriculum design, graphics,
web design, advertising, community organization, community relations, and diplomacy to
educate the public.
RECOMMENDATIONS — Alerts
R7. Collect Marin residents’ information and add it to Alert Marin and Nixle databases to
make them opt-out systems.
R8. Expand the use of sirens with LRADs.
RECOMMENDATIONS — Evacuations
R9. Research, develop, and publish plans for the mass movement of populations along
designated evacuation routes.
R10. Give the highest priority to mitigating known choke points and to maximizing the
capacity of existing evacuation routes.
R11. Incorporate and prioritize plans for mass evacuations in all pending and future
traffic/road projects along major escape routes.
R12. Educate, prepare, and drill for evacuations in all communities.
R13. Fully integrate public transit into the MERA communications system without further
delay.
R14. The Transportation Authority of Marin must convene all stakeholders no later than
December 31, 2019, to address congestion on escape routes in an evacuation.
RECOMMENDATIONS — Umbrella Entity
R15. Establish in the form of a Joint Powers Authority an umbrella organization for wildfire
planning and preparedness (vegetation management, public education, alerts, and
evacuation), funded by a ¼ cent sales tax.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 25 of 37
REQUEST FOR RESPONSES
Pursuant to Penal code section 933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows:
From the following governing bodies:
■ County of Marin Board of Supervisors (R1-13, R15)
■ Belvedere City Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Corte Madera Town Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Fairfax Town Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Larkspur City Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Mill Valley City Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Novato City Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Ross Town Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ San Anselmo Town Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ San Rafael City Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Sausalito City Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Tiburon Town Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Bolinas Fire Protection District Board of Directors (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Central Marin Fire Authority Council (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Inverness Public Utility District Board (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Kentfield Fire Protection District Board (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Marinwood Community Services District Board (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Novato Fire District Board of Directors (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Ross Valley Fire Department Board of Directors (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Sleepy Hollow Fire Protection District Board of Directors (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Southern Marin Fire Protection District Board of Directors (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Stinson Beach Fire Protection District Board (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Tiburon Fire Protection District Board of Directors (R1, R3-13, R15)
■ Marin Municipal Water District Board of Directors (R1, R2, R15)
■ Transportation Authority of Marin Board of Commissioners (R9-11, R14)
The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the
governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code section 933 (c) and subject to
the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act.
From the following individuals:
■ Marin County Sheriff (R7, R11)
The Grand Jury also invites responses from the following individuals:
■ FIRESafe Marin Council Coordinator
Note: At the time this report was prepared information was available at the websites listed.
Reports issued by the Civil 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 Civil Grand Jury. The California State Legislature has stated that it intends the provisions of Penal Code Section 929
prohibiting disclosure of witness identities to encourage full candor in testimony in Grand Jury investigations by protecting the
privacy and confidentiality of those who participate in any Civil Grand Jury investigation.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 26 of 37
APPENDIX A: Vegetation Management V E G E T A T I O N M A N A G E M E N T FIRE
DEPARTMENTS/
DISTRICTS
V/M STAFF TYPE OF INSPECTION ANNUAL PARCEL
INSPECTIONS
Bolinas Fire
Protection District
None noted Complaints & requests for
inspection; neighborhoods and
roads are inspected annually.
Goal: individual property
inspections every year: currently,
every 2-3-years.
Central Marin Fire
Authority (Larkspur &
Corte Madera)
None noted Yearly windshield inspections. 30
day Wildfire Hazard Notices
issued to those not in compliance
No specific goals
Inverness Volunteer
Fire Department
None noted Complaints & requests for
inspection
Inspect and note problem areas; no
specific goals; MCFD has records
of inspection frequency
Kentfield Fire Protection
District
Fire Inspector &
Community Risk
Reduction Specialist
Inspectors visit properties located
in WUI in May. Violators asked to
create defensible space by 6/15.
Required by law to inspect every
SRA parcel each year. Goal:
inspect 200 additional parcels/yr
Marin County Fire
Department (Marin Open
Space; provides fire ser-
vices to the GGNRA)
2 chief officers,
2 captains, 2 part-time
inspectors, 4-6 seasonal
defensible space
inspectors
Defensible Space Event in June: on
duty staff conduct inspections in their
response area. Seasonal firefighter
inspectors perform 4K+ defensible
space inspections/yr.
For the county, goal:: inspect
4500K parcels annually.
Mill Valley Fire
Department
None noted Proactive & maturing compliance
program requires active agency
management
Annually
Novato Fire District
None noted Engine crews drive WUI, leave door
hangers where needed. Inspect reported
properties, referred for review, or
requested for voluntary evaluation.
New construction & major remodels in
WUI must submit VM plan. Properties
for sale require inspection. Assessment
in May to determine which properties
must provide defensible space
Door hangers/windshield
inspections in the WUI followed
by notices. Homes remain on
watch list for 3 yrs.
Ross Valley Fire
Department (Fairfax, San
Anselmo, Ross, & the
Sleepy Hollow FPD)
VM program includes
on-duty engine
company, full-time
inspector, and 2 part-
time employees
26 hrs/week
New construction & major remodels in
WUI must submit VM plan. Properties
for sale require inspection. Engine
companies assess in May to determine
which properties must provide
defensible space
Currently, no goal, but if RVFD
Board approves dedicated
inspector program, will inspect 3-
4K parcels annually.
San Rafael Fire
Department
and Marinwood
2 dedicated VM fire
inspectors
Proactive inspections. Assist
rangers & remove homeless
encampments. Residents notified
yearly to keep defensible space.
Inspections conducted by request
Inspect all of the approx. 8K
parcels in the WUI in a 3 year
cycle
Southern Marin Fire
Protect. District (includes
Tam-Valley, Almonte,
Homestead Valley, Alto,
Strawberry, Sausalito, Fort
Baker, Marin Headlands,
part of Tiburon)
None noted None noted Annually inspects all parcels
Stinson Beach Fire
Protection District
None noted Some areas covered under Marin
County VM. Citizens perform
voluntary compliance
None
Tiburon Fire Protection
District (Tiburon and
Belvedere)
None noted Some areas covered under Marin
County VM. Citizens perform
voluntary compliance
Goal: to inspect 100% of high fire
severity zone parcels annually
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 27 of 37
APPENDIX A: Vegetation Management (cont’d) V E G E T A T I O N M A N A G E M E N T FIRE
DEPARTMENTS/
DISTRICTS
PROHIBITED
PLANTS
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
WITH V/M REMOVAL
WIDE CLEARANCE
ON EVAC ROUTES
Bolinas Fire
Protection District
None noted Matching grant opportunities for
vegetation clearance on non-county-
maintained roads
Collaborate with local utility district
to reduce vegetation
Central Marin Fire
Authority (Larkspur &
Corte Madera)
3K+ parcels are in WUI.
Major reconstruction
plans must be evaluated
by Fire Prevention
Bureau to ensure
pyrophytic plant
removed/not replanted
Free chipper program Yes
Inverness Volunteer
Fire Department
None noted Part of cost of chipper days
underwritten
Fire Dept. partners with MCFD & Fire
Safe Marin for clearing along the local
major evacuation routes
Kentfield Fire Protection
District
None noted
Not currently Roadside clearance is Marin DPW
responsibility. Standards in place to
ensure private driveways are maintained
to current standards.
Marin County Fire
Department (Marin Open
Space; provides fire ser-
vices to the GGNRA)
New construction &
substantial remodels in
WUI prohibit pyrophytic
plants w/in 100’ of
structures. Otherwise,
prohibition not feasible
(unless in close
proximity to residential
structures)
$15K CA Fire Foundation grant
matched plus $15K from BOS,
North Bay Lessons Learned
Committee. Coordinating with
HHS Senior Protective Service to
identify persons in need
No. There is no code that requires
extra wide vegetation clearances
Mill Valley Fire
Department
Changing code to
prohibit bamboo,
juniper, cypress,
acacia and bays
within 30’ of
structures
Considering a program similar to
Novato Fire’s grant program
Yes, clear vegetation but it is not
specified to be extra wide
Novato Fire District
None noted Matching grant to owners, 1x/yr. $500
for chipper/fuel removal. HOAs in WUI
offered annual matching grant to $1500
for same
Major evacuation routes maintained
by CalTrans.
Ross Valley Fire
Department (Fairfax, San
Anselmo, Ross, & the
Sleepy Hollow FPD)
New construction &
substantial remodels
in WUI prohibit
pyrophytic plants and
require a Veg. Mgrt
Plan be submitted.
$15K CA Fire Foundation grant
matched plus $15K from BOS,
North Bay Lessons Learned
Committee. Coordinating with
HHS Senior Protective Service to
identify persons in need
No. There is no code that requires
extra wide vegetation clearances
San Rafael Fire
Department
and Marinwood
Mandatory removal
of juniper and
bamboo
Free chipper service for juniper
and bamboo
Requires a 10’ clearance from
roadway on each side: considering
additional distances in WUI
Southern Marin Fire
Protect. District (incl Tam-
Valley, Almonte, Homestead
Valley, Alto, Strawberry,
Sausalito, Fort Baker, Marin
Headlands, part of Tiburon)
Code prohibits
bamboo, juniper,
cypress, acacia and
bays within 30’ of
structures
Regularly partner with Tam Valley
Community Services District to
manage grants used for chipper
days and other vegetation
management programs
Enforce access/defensible space
requirements/ vegetation clearances;
Roadways to maintain flammable
vegetation clearance from roadway 10 feet
onto properties. Inspect roadways
annually
Stinson Beach Fire
Protection District
None noted Chipper days Yes
Tiburon Fire Protection
District (Tiburon and
Belvedere)
None noted No Yes
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 28 of 37
APPENDIX B: Education E D U C A T I O N FIRE DEPARTMENTS/
DISTRICTS EDUCATION STAFF PROGRAMS/EVENTS
Bolinas Fire
Protection District
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
Annual community forums held with
moderate attendance
Central Marin Fire Authority
(Larkspur & Corte Madera)
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
32 Neighborhood Response Groups with
coordinator; partners with FD to provide
fire safety education
Inverness Volunteer
Fire Department
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
Inverness Disaster Council, West Marin
Disaster Council
Kentfield Fire Protection
District
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
Kentfield Fire District employees. Fire
Inspector and Community Risk Reduction
Specialist, educating the community and
school children within the community.
Marin County Fire
Department (Marin Open
Space; provides fire ser-
vices to the GGNRA)
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
Supported by Marin BOS, CALFIRE,
FIRESafe Marin, CERTs and disaster
councils
Mill Valley Fire Department
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
Rotary Club organizes and sponsors events;
Emergency Preparedness Commission
sponsors programs
Novato Fire District
No staff fully dedicated to education
but firefighters implement door hanger
program targeting WUI
neighborhoods annually
Ready, Set, Go: Get Ready Novato;
FireWise Communities; Cal Fires, Prevent
Wildfire California, Ready for Wildfire,
One Less Spark
Ross Valley Fire Department
(Fairfax, San Anselmo, Ross,
& the Sleepy Hollow FPD)
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
Materials provided by FSM, Marin County
Fire Chiefs Assoc.
San Rafael Fire Department
and Marinwood
Firefighters assist Prevention and OES
staff with presentations, inspections
and public outreach
San Rafael Fire Commission and
San Rafael Fire Foundation fund wildfire
education along with FireSafe Marin
and Firewise USA
Southern Marin Fire Protect.
District (includes Tam-
Valley, Almonte, Homestead
Valley, Alto, Strawberry,
Sausalito, Fort Baker, Marin
Headlands, part of Tiburon)
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
Partners with Tam Valley Community
Services District and Marin County FD to
prepare and educate public
Stinson Beach Fire Protection
District
No staff fully dedicated to education.
Firefighters are trained to teach
preparedness to the public
None
Tiburon Fire Protection
District (Tiburon and
Belvedere)
Deputy Fire Marshal performs public
education for emergency preparation;
all firefighters can teach defensible
space practices.
Belvedere-Tiburon Joint Disaster
Council promotes wildfire and Get Ready
awareness programs.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 29 of 37
APPENDIX B: Education (cont’d) E D U C A T I O N FIRE DEPARTMENTS/
DISTRICTS
EDUCATIONAL READINESS
& PREPAREDNESS GOALS SUCCESSES
Bolinas Fire
Protection District
Not ready for next fire season.
Property owners not engaged/active in
preparedness. Neighbors encouraged
to know each other
Over 200 residents did evacuation drill and
discussion of fire hazard mitigation
Central Marin Fire Authority
(Larkspur & Corte Madera)
Participation in NRGs increases each
year. Community forums,
presentations
Several neighborhoods pursuing FireWise
recognition
Inverness Volunteer
Fire Department
Residents are prepared as neighbors
helping neighbors
Designated local neighborhood disaster
groups since 1982; fire safety covered at
group meetings
Kentfield Fire Protection
District
Kentfield Fire District conducting
inspections to prep for next fire
season; secured grant to create a
defensible space between District and
large landowner partners.
Kent Woodlands community is Firewise
certified
Marin County Fire
Department (Marin Open
Space; provides fire ser-
vices to the GGNRA)
Referenced in Marin County
Performance Measures and Lessons
Learned
FireWise participation, evacuation
exercises and community meetings
Mill Valley Fire Department Working towards entire community
becoming FireWise certified
2-minute videos on website; 8 community
meetings; numerous FireWise communities
Novato Fire District
Neighbors helping neighbors: three
FireWise communities are ready for
next fire season
4 FireWise Communities: Pacheco Valley,
MVMCC, Black Point/Green Point, Indian
Valley; HOAs - Wildhorse Valley and
Bahia
Ross Valley Fire Department
(Fairfax, San Anselmo, Ross,
& the Sleepy Hollow FPD)
Hosting community meetings; and
referenced in Marin County
Performance Measures and
Lessons Learned
Cascade Canyon and Sleepy Hollow
FireWise Communities
San Rafael Fire Department
and Marinwood
San Rafael Wildfire Protection Plan
has 37 recommendations to make
SR fire safe.
4 Firewise communities, 20+ HOA wildfire
safety/preparedness presentations in 2018,
2 Wildfire Preparedness Symposia at
Dominican in 2018
Southern Marin Fire Protect.
District (includes Tam-
Valley, Almonte, Homestead
Valley, Alto, Strawberry,
Sausalito, Fort Baker, Marin
Headlands, part of Tiburon)
No goals set yet; anticipate more with
the passage of Measure U
3 Get Ready programs which have low
participation
Stinson Beach Fire Protection
District
Work in progress; hiring fire
prevention officer
Meetings with Marin County FD and
GGNRA
Tiburon Fire Protection
District (Tiburon and
Belvedere)
2-3 additional FireWise Communities
in 2019
First FireWise Community of Harbor Hill
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 30 of 37
APPENDIX C: Evacuations & Alerts E V A C U A T I O N S & A L E R T S FIRE
DEPARTMENTS/
DISTRICTS
SPECIAL
NEEDS/
ELDERLY
LISTS
EVACUATION
CHOKE POINTS
HIGH-RISK
COMMUNITIES
TRANSIT
DEPENDENT
COMMUNITIES
Bolinas Fire
Protection District
Disaster council, fire
department keep list
of at-risk residents
Elm Road, Evergreen Rd,
Mesa Rd, Olema-Bolinas
Rd
Yes. All communities on
gridded Mesa are high risk
No
Central Marin Fire
Authority (Larkspur &
Corte Madera)
32 NRGs maintain
lists
Madrone & Magnolia Aves.
Redwood & Corte Madera
Aves.
Corte Madera: Christmas Tree
Hill, Sausalito Ave. (aka Hidden
Valley). Larkspur: Baltimore
Canyon, Marina Vista Area
Madrone & Magnolia Aves.
Redwood & Corte Madera
Aves. Corte Madera: Christmas
Tree Hill, Sausalito Ave. (aka
Hidden Valley). Larkspur:
Baltimore
Canyon, Marina Vista Area
No official
accounting
Inverness Volunteer
Fire Department
Yes Sir Francis Drake is the
only road in and out
Seahaven No
Kentfield Fire Protection
District
No Sir Francis Drake at Hwy
101
Most residential
communities at risk
None
Marin County Fire
Department (Marin Open
Space; provides fire ser-
vices to the GGNRA)
Residents with
special needs, or
elderly must
make MCFD aware
of their status
Yes, most non-county
maintained roads in West
Marin
Yes, refer to 2016 CWPP
pages 43-56
Unknown
Mill Valley Fire
Department
Maintain a list of
those with
additional needs,
though this
changes often and
is unreliable
All non-county maintained
roads in West Marin are
choke points. SFDB, Miller
Ave, Blithedale leading to
Hwy 101 and on ramps to
Hwy 101
75% of MV is in the WUI
and therefore at risk
The Redwoods
Novato Fire District
No Atherton on-ramp NB on 101;
North of San Rafael SB 101; on
HWY 37 (Sonoma County) past
raceway, Novato Blvd and
Diablo Ave.
Wildhorse Valley, Atherton,
Marin Valley, Little Mountain,
San Marin, Blackpoint, Cherry
Hill, Indian Valley, Ignacio
Valley, Pacheco Valley,
Anderson Rowe, Loma Verde,
President’s (IVC), Wilson West
Novato North, Hilltop
EOC has
information
on agencies to
contact
Ross Valley Fire
Department (Fairfax, San
Anselmo, Ross, & the
Sleepy Hollow FPD)
Residents with
special needs or
elderly must make
RVFD aware of
their status
Most of RVFD’s response
area consists of single lane
roads leading to single
artery roadway
Yes, refer to 2016 CWPP
pages 43-56
Unknown
San Rafael Fire
Department
and Marinwood
Promote
neighborhood
awareness through
GetReady and CERT
None identified All neighborhoods in the
WUI
Residential,
assisting living
facilities, Kaiser
patients
Southern Marin Fire
Protect. District (includes
Tam-Valley, Almonte,
Homestead Valley, Alto,
Strawberry, Sausalito, Fort
Baker, Marin Headlands,
part of Tiburon)
List of residents of
Sausalito only.
Every intersection is a
choke point. Control of
intersections is by PD and
DPW
Districts near the WUI and
areas within canyons
Public transit
is available in flatter
topographic areas
Stinson Beach Fire
Protection District
Yes No No No
Tiburon Fire Protection
District (Tiburon and
Belvedere)
PD departments
maintain lists
Currently creating “Red
Zones”
Neighborhoods adjacent to
open space at ridgeline
Neds Way
/downtown rely on
public transit
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 31 of 37
APPENDIX C: Evacuations & Alerts (cont’d) E V A C U A T I O N S & A L E R T S FIRE
DEPARTMENTS/
DISTRICTS
EVACUATION
ROUTES
PUBLICIZED
SIRENS COMMUNITY
DRILLS
CITE & TOW
ON
EVACUATION
ROUTES
Bolinas Fire
Protection District
Policy decision not
to publicize routes
No sirens currently;
researching LRAD
1 drill held in 2017:
Planning annual drills
No
Central Marin Fire
Authority (Larkspur &
Corte Madera)
Evacuation routes
are not publicized.
Planning is key
element of the
NRGs
1 siren and 1 diaphon
system in Corte Madera not
yet operational.
Considering LRAD
Drill in 2018 had 18%
participation. Plan to
conduct one exercise/year
CMFD has no
authority to cite
vehicles
Inverness Volunteer
Fire Department
No. Dependent on
specifics of the
emergency
Sirens determined to be
ineffective
Monthly radio drills with
CERT, daily radio checks
No parking within 6’
of center of road.
Violators cited.
Kentfield Fire Protection
District
Possible evacuation
routes are available to
the public through
marinfire.org. No
signage used.
Kentfield Fire District has
one Siren. Test of LRAD
did not meet expectations
Evacuation drills held in
Kent Woodlands; Full
campus drill held at COM
2018. Yearly drills held
with all schools
Parking enforcement
issues are referred to
the Sheriff’s office
Marin County Fire
Department (Marin Open
Space; provides fire ser-
vices to the GGNRA)
No. Dependent on
specifics of the
emergency
One siren on Throckmorton
Ridge
As needed MCFD has no
authority to enforce
vehicle code
Mill Valley Fire
Department
Steps, Lanes and
Paths are marked
evacuation routes
5 sirens located throughout
the City. LRAD system on
order
1 drill performed each year Yes. Cite and tow
Novato Fire District
Evacuation points for
Blackpoint/
Greenpoint & Marin
Valley Mobile
Country Club
No Coordinates drills, targeting
WUI areas every 3-5 years
Yes. Cites vehicles.
Works
with NPD and CHP
Ross Valley Fire
Department (Fairfax, San
Anselmo, Ross, & the
Sleepy Hollow FPD)
No. Dependent on
specifics of the
emergency
Sirens in Fairfax, San Anselmo
and Ross. Recommend a battery
backup weather radio activated
by the Emergency Alert System
As needed RVFD has no
authority to enforce
vehicle code
San Rafael Fire
Department
and Marinwood
Encourage
residents to know
an alternate to
standard routes
No sirens. Rely upon
NIXLE, WEA. Evaluating
other systems
On a small scale in various
neighborhoods
No parking within 6’ of
center of road.
Violators cited.
Working to designate
parking in WUI zones
& towing under red
flag conditions
Southern Marin Fire
Protect. District (includes
Tam-Valley, Almonte,
Homestead Valley, Alto,
Strawberry, Sausalito,
Fort Baker, Marin
Headlands, part of
Tiburon)
No. There is a
potential conflict
with actual
emergency
evacuation needs
No fixed sirens.
Coordinating with OES.
LRAD can be linked to
Alert Marin and Everbridge
One or two every year Yes. Cite and tow
Stinson Beach Fire
Protection District
No Yes No, but working on plans No
Tiburon Fire Protection
District (Tiburon and
Belvedere)
No, but working
on plans
6 sirens currently in use.
Considering LRAD
Not presently All vehicle
violations are
referred to the PD
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 32 of 37
APPENDIX D: Recommended Structure and Membership for Entity
The Grand Jury recommends the following entities be members of the Entity. Listed in
alphabetical order, with the fire districts first, the entities are:
1. Bolinas Fire Protection District
2. Central Marin Fire Authority – serves the City of Larkspur and Town of Corte Madera
3. Inverness Volunteer Fire Dept. – run by the Inverness Public Utility
4. Kentfield Fire Protection District
5. Marin County Fire Department – serves unincorporated Marin County not within a Fire
District and contracts to provide wildland fire protection with CAL Fire for all State
Responsibility areas and with Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) and
Point Reyes National Seashore (PRNSS) for Federal Responsibility Area FRA within the
County.
6. Marin Municipal Water District
7. Marinwood Community Services District – Fire Department
8. Novato Fire Protection District
9. Ross Valley Fire Department – serves the Towns of San Anselmo, Fairfax, Ross and the
Sleepy Hollow Fire Protection District
10. Sleepy Hollow Fire Protection District – provides only pre-ignition and pre-suppression
services to Sleepy Hollow
11. Southern Marin Fire Protection District – serves the communities of Tamalpais Valley,
Almonte, Homestead Valley, Alto, Strawberry, approximately 1/4 of the Town of
Tiburon, the City of Sausalito, Fort Baker and the Marin Headlands.
12. Stinson Beach Fire Protection District
13. Tiburon Fire Protection District – serves the Town of Tiburon and City of Belvedere and
surrounding areas.
14. County of Marin
15. City of Belvedere
16. Town of Corte Madera
17. City of Fairfax
18. City of Larkspur
19. City of Mill Valley
20. City of Novato
21. Town of Ross
22. Town of San Anselmo
23. City of San Rafael
24. City of Sausalito
25. Town of Tiburon
Since having 25 members would make the Entity difficult to manage, the Grand Jury
recommends that the Entity hire an executive director. This should be a person with considerable
knowledge and experience with the key pre-ignition and pre-suppression issues such as
community education, vegetation management, alert notices, and evacuation policies. This
person would be employed to create processes and programs, emphasizing “best practices,” for
all pre-ignition and pre-suppression matters. To do this, the executive director would be
authorized to hire staff necessary to carry out the Entity’s mandate.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 33 of 37
To help guide the executive director and staff with policy development, the Grand Jury
recommends that the Entity as a whole, select a group of individuals from its membership to act
as a Board of Directors. Finally, the Grand Jury recommends that the County Counsel’s office be
authorized to draft the legal documents to create the Entity as well as the ballot measure for the
¼ cent sales tax.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 34 of 37
APPENDIX E: The 7 Deadly Sins of Emergency Management
At a conference in Stockholm, Sweden on November 28, 2017, Craig Fugate, former
Administrator of FEMA under President Obama, discussed what he considers to be
The 7 Deadly Sins of Emergency Management:19
1. We plan for what we are capable of responding to.
2. We plan for our communities by placing our vulnerable populations aside.
3. We do drills and exercises that we know will be successful.
4. We think our emergency response system can scale up from small emergencies to large
disasters.
5. We build our emergency management team around government, leaving out volunteer
organizations, the private sector and the public.
6. We treat the public as a liability.
7. We price risk too low to change behavior; as a result, risk grows.
Marin’s emergency management plans replicate these errors.
19 Fugate, Craig. “ The 7 Deadly Sins of Emergency Management.” YouTube video. Viewed Jan.10, 2019.
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 35 of 37
APPENDIX F: A Case in Point: Paradise and Marin
The Grand Jury visited Paradise, California in January 2019. Here are some of the major
contrasts and comparisons between Paradise’s wildfire preparedness and Marin’s current
preparedness:
■ Paradise has three well-paved good roads out of town.
■ Marin has many communities located in canyons with only one exit on narrow, poorly
maintained roads.
■ All of Marin’s main east west evacuation routes have choke points where they narrow to
one lane in each direction.
■ At the time of the Camp Fire, most of Paradise's fire and police officers lived in town and
were on the job quickly.
■ Marin's fire and police officers often live in other counties which will severely delay
response time. It may take hours for emergency personnel to get here.
■ Paradise had comprehensive evacuation plans that were tested in previous fires and had
conducted practice evacuation drills. Even so, it took around 5 hours to evacuate the
town.
■ Marin’s OES has given itself 36 months to update its evacuation plans.
■ Marin has no comprehensive evacuation plans that have been shared with the public, and
only a few neighborhoods have had an evacuation drill.
■ Paradise had failed to manage vegetation, particularly along evacuation routes.
■ Marin has failed to manage vegetation adequately in its residential communities, open
space and along evacuation routes.
■ The fire in Paradise did not come from the usual direction but came from the opposite
direction from what was expected.
■ Fire in Marin could come from any direction depending on the prevailing wind.
■ The Butte County Grand Jury report on Paradise in 2008 criticized the lack of an
adequate number of evacuation routes and the deliberate narrowing of the main
evacuation routes.
■ Many jurisdictions in Marin deliberately constrict the flow of traffic along already narrow
evacuation routes with lane reductions and road impediments..
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 36 of 37
APPENDIX G: Sales Tax
With the local sales cap at 2%, the final quarter cent only applies to jurisdictions that are
currently at 9%. The following are the breakdown of Marin jurisdictions and what the local rates
are: 20
Jurisdiction Current Sales Tax Local Sales Rate
Corte Madera 9.00% 0.75%
Fairfax 9.00% 0.75%
Larkspur 9.00% 0.75%
San Rafael 9.00% 0.75%
San Anselmo 8.75% 0.50%
Sausalito 8.75% 0.50%
Novato 8.50% 0.25%
Tiburon 8.25% 0%
Belvedere 8.25% 0%
County of Marin 8.25% 0.25%
Mill Valley 8.25% 0%
Ross 8.25% 0%
From this, it can be seen that only four out of the 12 taxing authorities in Marin are at the limit. There
are 16 cities, all in LA County, that each have their combined sales tax rate over 10% as well as seven
cities in the Bay Area that are over the 9.25% cap.
20 “California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.” CA.Gov. Accessed on 25 Mar. 2019
Wildfire Preparedness: A New Approach
April 18, 2019 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 37 of 37
APPENDIX H: Prior Marin County Civil Grand Jury Reports on Wildfire (Since 2000)
Marin Civil Grand Jury, “Wildfires — Partners in Prevention”, 2002-03
Marin Civil Grand Jury, “The Next Disaster: Are Marin Citizens Prepared?”, 2005-06
Marin Civil Grand Jury, “Marin on Fire! Not if, but when, 2007-08
Marin Civil Grand Jury, “Disaster Preparedness in Marin: Are You Ready?”, 2010-11
Marin Civil Grand Jury, “Marin on Fire Redux”, 2012-13