My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2012-09-10
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
AgdaPkt 2012-09-10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2012 5:16:54 PM
Creation date
9/6/2012 4:57:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency
Date
9/10/2012
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
900
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
This is an ad�anced capy of a Grand Jury report fihat w�ll be publiciy released on <br /> '..'•, � ''^"2 penal Code section 933.05 (f� prohibits any officer, agency, <br /> 6.1.K. - Page 13 • go�erning hody of a pu�[ic agency from disclasing any cont�nts <br /> of#he report prior to the puf�lic releas� of this repor�. <br /> 22. According to FEMA's list of levees in San Mateo County, dated March 12, 2012,there is <br /> one l�vee in South San Francisco. <br /> 23. Soutl� San �'rancisco has not reconciled this discrepancy with FEMA. <br /> 2�. FEMA has categorized the levee in South San Francisco as De- Accredited. Tk�e levee <br /> does not meet flood protection cri�eria; therefore, flood prot�ction insurance to <br /> corresponding adjacent areas may be required. <br /> 25. The City of South San Franczsco did not deveIap or subrnit an EAP for its disputed Ievee. <br /> Conclusions <br /> The Grand Jury concl�des: <br /> I. The risk of levee failure has not been a priority for the cities and County as evidenced by <br /> the lac�C af EAPs before the 2007 Grand ,Tury Report an.d the inadequate fallow through <br /> on their awn commitments five years later. <br /> 2. The failure of the Emergency Services Council to adequately�und OES's development af <br /> Emergency Action Plans for levee failures is contrary to its Mzssion Statement (See, <br /> At�achment 2). <br /> 3. EAPs specific to levee fail�u�es are needed to assure the apprapriate xesponse to such an <br /> err�erg�ncy. <br /> 4. The failure of cities and the County OES to share dam and levee information is an <br /> impediznent to the deveiopment of EAPs and the deployment of an effective emergency <br /> response. • <br /> 5. The failure of OES to develop standardized requirements for EAPs led to the creation of <br /> inconsistent plans that vary in detail. <br /> 6. OES has no formal process�o require and receive yearly updated EAPs from the affected <br /> Ievee owners, making it difficult to track compliance and offer guidance and assistance to <br /> cities developing#heir plans. <br /> 7. Inadequate comzn�nication between FEMA and levee owners results in discrepancies <br /> over own�rship responsib'rlity, such as currently exist between FEMA and South San <br /> Francisco and East Palo Alto. <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.