City Hall: 955 School Street, Napa CA 94559 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 660, Napa CA 94559 (707) 257-9500 www.cityofnapa.org September 6, 2022
The Honorable Victoria Wood
Superior Court of Napa County
825 Brown Street
Napa, CA 94559
Subject: City of Napa Response to the 2021-2022 Napa County Grand Jury Final Report entitled “City of Napa Community Development Department” Dear Judge Wood:
The City of Napa has received and carefully reviewed the 2021-2022 Napa County Grand Jury Report entitled “City of Napa Community Development Department ,” dated June 13, 2022 (hereinafter “Grand Jury Report”). Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, this letter documents the City’s responses to each finding and recommendation in the Grand Jury Report (hereinafter “City Response”). The City Response was prepared by City staff, including the Community Development Director, and presented to the City Council for their consideration.
At the public meeting on September 6, 2022, the City Council approved this City Response and directed the City Manager to submit this City Response on behalf of the City Council.
Therefore, this City Response represents the required response to the Grand Jury Report from the City Council of the City of Napa as well as the invited resp onse from the Community Development Director.
General Responses
There are several statements made in the Summary and Discussion sections of the Grand Jury Report that do not accurately represent the process followed for application processing within the City of Napa. For accuracy purposes, below are statements that have been extracted from the Summary and Discussion sections (shown in itallics) followed by language that either clarifies the City’s understanding of the statements, or corrects the language:
The five divisions within the CDD review building plans and construction for both residential and commercial purposes. The City’s Department of Public Works must also review the plans for larger projects and for City entities outside of the CDD, such as the City of Napa Fire Department.
City Response: The City of Napa does not agree with these statements. The Community Development Department (CDD) coordinates the City’s review and regulation of building plans from private property owners and developers, which includes services from City staff from five different City departments: CDD, Public Works, Utilities, Parks and Recreation ATTACHMENT 1
City of Napa Response to 20
21 -
20 2
2 Napa County Grand
Jury
Final Report
entitled
“
City of Napa Community Development Department
”
Page
2 of
5 City Hall: 955 School Street, Napa CA 94559
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 660, Napa CA 94559
(707) 257
-
9500
www.cityofnapa.org
Services
,
and Fire
.
Of the
five
divisions within
CDD
,
two
participate in the review of
construction plans and permits; the Planning Division and the Building Division.
The
Public Works Department
(not a
division
with
in
CDD)
reviews all levels of projects (not just
“larger projects”) and the Public Works Depart
ment
does not
review plans on behalf of any
other City department or outside agency.
It should also be noted that
the
Fire Prevention
Division of the Fire Department
,
and
the
Utilities
Department
(including its
divisions of
Water
and Materials
Div
er
sion
)
also
review constru
ction plans and permits
.
The Grand Jury also found that there is no systematic review of applications for permits on structures with potential historic importance.
City Response
:
The City does not agree with t
his statement
.
The City of Napa has a
Historic
Resources
Inventory
(HRI)
that is used to identify,
by list and
within
the City’s
permit tracking software (
Trakit
)
, all parcels
that contain potentially historic resources
.
Any
Planning application and/or
Building Permit application
for
a property identified on the H
RI
is
immediately
“flagged”
through Trakit,
and
if exterior changes are proposed,
the proper
cultural review process is followed according to local and State require ments
.
Under the Discussion section of the report, there is the following statement
(second paragraph of
section)
:
First, City offices were closed during much of 2020, thus, residents and businesses which sough t
approval for projects and permits
could
not have face
-
to
-
face access with department staff.
Access to staff was strictly online, either through websites, email, or phone calls and texting.
City Response
: The City does not agree with this statement. The
Community
Development Department
(CDD)
public service counter
s (i.e. Planning, Code
Enforcement and Building Divisions)
w
ere
closed for a total of two
-
weeks at the outset of
the
COVID
-
19 global
pandemic
in
March
2020
. This short period provided the opportunity
to
develop strategies
on how
to carry
-
out the
public service mission of the CDD
,
and
to
ensure safe interactions for both customers and staff. For most of 2020
and all of 2021
and 2022
, CDD staff accepted in
-
p
erson meetings, application submittals and other
needed
project
meetings at the public service counters.
Face
-
to
-
face project submittals
occurred, and the Building Division continued to accept all Building Permit applications, resubmittals and
permit
questions at the public service counter throughout this time.
Videoconferencing,
with applicants and their professionals about project submittals was a practice started in the pandemic
, learned to very efficient during this height of the crisis and a cont
inued practice today.
Grand Jury Report
Finding 1
–
The City of Napa’s Community Development Department’s IT system is obsolete, does not meet current needs, and has contributed to delays in review proces
ses
.
City
Response
–
The City
of Napa
agrees
with the finding
.
Grand Jury Report
Finding 2
–
A new IT system will be implement by the City over the next 16 -
18 months starting in February 2022
City
Response
–
The City
of Napa
agrees with the finding.
The new system will replace
Trakit, the current software used to track project , permit and property information within the City of Napa. The new system is provided by Tyler Technologies, is called Energov, and will greatly improve the services provided
by the City through a more robust public
interface, and
improved accessibility by City Staff and the public.
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Napa Response to 20
21 -
20 2
2 Napa County Grand
Jury
Final Report
entitled
“
City of Napa Community Development Department
”
Page
3 of
5 City Hall: 955 School Street, Napa CA 94559
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 660, Napa CA 94559
(707) 257
-
9500
www.cityofnapa.org
Grand Jury Report
Finding 3
–
The contracts for the new IT system have be
e
n signed and the
funds allocated. The
CDD currently does not use the current IT system but in the future it will be integrated into the new IT system. The new system will be Tyler Intergov and is clou d based,
which is a substantial advantage.
This system will be integrated into all of the other City systems of the other departments that are involved in the application review process.
City
Response
–
The City
of Napa
disagrees with
some
statements in
this finding.
It should be noted that t
he
C
ity of Napa
does
currently have, and
regularly
use
s
, a
software system
called Trakit. Trakit will be replaced by Energov,
with the database contained in Trakit
, along with
other
database platforms
, used to
support the functionality of
Energov
.
In addition,
for
clarity
,
Energov will be used by all other City Departments that currently utilize Trakit.
Grand Jury Report
Finding 4
–
Most documents project applicants need to complete the CDD review process will be submitted and available
online at full implementation of the new IT system.
It will no longer be necessary to provide multiple copies of plans because all departments involv ed
in the review process of projects will be able to access the same data online .
City
Response
–
The City of Napa agrees with this finding.
It is the City of Napa’s ultimate goal
to fully facilitate electronic application (and plans) filing for entitlements and building permits.
Grand Jury Report
Finding 5
–
The CDD’s application review process and general
responsiveness to the public were adversely affected by the COVID pandemi c
.
City
Response
–
The City of Napa agrees with this finding.
Grand Jury Report
Finding
6 –
Citizen groups often provide new information
at the public
meetings to the Planning Commission which can result in a delay of a project .
City
Response
–
The
City of Napa agrees with this finding.
It is factual to state that
information provided to the Planning Commission at
public hearings c
an
result in the delay of a project
application
.
The very purpose of the public hearing is to allow all
interested partie
s, neighbors, citizens, applicant, staff, etc.
, an opportunity to voice opinion
s
on
an
application before the Planning Commission.
It is the Planning Commission
’
s responsibility to
assess the statements made
and make a decision on the application. At time
s, information shared
at a public hearing need
s
additional staff analysis
and at times the information shared is in need
of consideration by the applica
n
t because it may require modification to the
proposal.
In some
cases, items are continued by the Planning Commission
to
allow the needed time to assess the
request and return to the Commission for further consideration and action.
Grand Jury Report
Finding
7 –
The Grand Jury
believes that CDD’s fees are app
ropriate since
they cover services not provided by other jurisdictions .
City
Response
–
The City of Napa agrees with this finding.
Grand Jury Report
Finding 8
–
The absence of expertise in CDD regarding the renovation of historic
sites means that some historic building project applications might not receive appropriate review
.
City
Response
–
The City of Napa
dis
agrees with this finding.
As stated above, all potentially historic properties requiring special attention and/or review
are
listed on the City of Napa Historic
Resource Inventory
list (HRI). This list is also a data point that
is “tagged” to each parcel within Trakit
,
show
n in the system
as a special sensitivity need should
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Napa Response to 20
21 -
20 2
2 Napa County Grand
Jury
Final Report
entitled
“
City of Napa Community Development Department
”
Page
4 of
5 City Hall: 955 School Street, Napa CA 94559
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 660, Napa CA 94559
(707) 257
-
9500
www.cityofnapa.org
there be a building permit or other
application made for an HRI property.
Utilizing the Secretary
of Interior Standards (State of California adopted guidance and regulations applicable to historic buildings and structures)
, and local requirements
, staff evaluates a proposal for consistency.
Larger
, more comple
x
projects will involve
contract specialists to assist staff and the Cultural
Heritage Commission with
the necessary evaluation.
Grand Jury Report
Recommendation 1
–
The Grand Jury recommends
that management fast
-
track the implementati
on of the Tyler Intergov Information System and encourage CDD’s employees in their training and use of the new system
.
City
Response
–
This
recommendation
has already been implemented.
Prior to receipt of the Grand Jury report, the City of Napa had begun implementation of Energov and
staff
training is ongoing.
Grand Jury Report Recommendation
2 –
The City should designate a project manager to have
oversight over the review
process for plans as they move through the departments and oversee the timeframe to increase efficiency
.
City
Response
–
This recommendation has been implemented
.
Each application submitted to the City of Napa is assigned a project manager to ensure the ap
plication
is handled appropriately
. The project manager, whether in the Planning or Building Division, ensures
there is a point of contact for the applicant, and that the needed information to complete the application processing is
complete
, analyzed and
incorporated into the decision
-
making process.
Grand Jury Report Recommendation
3 –
The City should develop an
historic buildings resource
database and integrate it into its new IT system
.
City
Response
–
This recommendation has been implemented
.
The City of Napa has a Historic Resource Inventory
(HRI)
that is currently integrated into Trakit,
the City’s current land management system. The
new system, Energov, will also contain
the
necessary information to identify all HRI properties.
Grand Jury Report Recommendation
4 –
The grand Jury suggest that the
Planning
Commission and City Council meet yearly to discuss future growth and development issues .
City
Response
–
This recommendation has been implemented
.
The City Council and Planning Commission jointly met on March 28, 2022
. It is the stated
intention of the City Council that such a joint meeting happen on an annual basis.
Grand Jury Report Recommendation
5 –
The Community Development Department
should
educate the public about the Napa City fee structures to make clear they include
services that are
not offered by other cities
.
This approach results in extra costs outside the fee services in those other cities.
City
Response
–
This recommendation
has been implemented.
The City of Napa Fee
information is readily available on the City of Napa website
and as a hand
-
out at the Planning and Building public service counters . In addition, the development application
itself provides a description
of the fee collection and
assessment process
.
If you
or the Grand Jury Foreperson
have any questions regarding the City’s response, please let
me know
.
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Napa Response to 20
21 -
20 2
2 Napa County Grand
Jury
Final Report
entitled
“
City of Napa Community Development Department
”
Page
5 of
5 City Hall: 955 School Street, Napa CA 94559
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 660, Napa CA 94559
(707) 257
-
9500
www.cityofnapa.org
Respectfully Submitted,
__
____________________________
Steve Potter
, City Manager
c
c:
Foreperson, 20
2 1
-
20 2
2 Napa County Grand Jury
, 1754 3
rd
St, Ste D, Napa 94559
Michael Barrett, City Attorney
Vin Smith, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENT 1