Score: +7
(10/3/3)
San Diego County Grand Jury
• 2016-2017
San Diego County Waterfront Park Setting a Poor Example of Water Use
7 pages
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 3 findings
F01
In the event of a declared water emergency, the County has no formal water- conservation plan for the Waterfront Park. Fact: The County has reduced the daily water consumption of the fountains and associated reflecting pools by reducing the fountain operating hours. Fact: The County has replaced the original filters for the treated fountain water with a more efficient, reliable, and less water-intensive filtration system. Fact: There are additional potable water conservation measures (low-use lawn conversion and fountain system management) that can be employed at the Waterfront Park.
F02
The County has not maximized its potable water conservation opportunities at the Waterfront Park. Fact: Total CAC water consumption for the fountains and central plant since May 2014 is 10 million gallons of potable water. Fact: Fountain-only water consumption is not measured.
F03
Insufficient data is available to accurately measure and manage fountain water conservation.
Recommendations 4
-
17-04Page 5Prepare an emergency drought-response plan for the Waterfront Park
-
17-05Page 5Implement a proactive, ongoing water-conservation program for the
-
17-06Page 6Develop a means to measure fountain water consumption at the
-
17-07Page 6Develop for the Waterfront Park a public recreational usage profile of
Agency Responses 8
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
▶
City of San Diego
November 14, 2017
• 3 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F01
In the event of a declared water emergency, the County has no formal water- conservation plan for the Waterfront Park. Fact: The County has reduced the daily water consumption of the fountains and associated reflecting pools by reducing the fountain operating hours. Fact: The County has replaced the original filters for the treated fountain water with a more efficient, reliable, and less water-intensive filtration system. Fact: There are additional potable water conservation measures (low-use la...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Mayor and City Council agree with the Grand Jury's finding.
F02
The County has not maximized its potable water conservation opportunities at the Waterfront Park. Fact: Total CAC water consumption for the fountains and central plant since May 2014 is 10 million gallons of potable water. Fact: Fountain-only water consumption is not measured.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Mayor and City Council agree with the Grand Jury's finding. Agencies and funding exist and are being combined to produce low-income housing, which could save taxpayers money by getting the most vulnerable off the streets. The City is also diligently working to leverage all available resources to address this issue. For instance, the City is working with the San Diego Housing Commission (Housing Commission) on the next phase of its Homelessness Action Plan, HOUSING FIRST - SAN DIEGO, to leverage $79.7 million in local and federal funding over the next three years to provide housing opportun...
F03
Insufficient data is available to accurately measure and manage fountain water conservation.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Mayor and City Council agree with the Grand Jury's finding. The City follows, and will continue to follow, all state mandates intended to make appropriate properties available for low-income housing as prescribed by the California Surplus Land Act-see response to
▶
City of San Diego
June 30, 2017
•
7 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
F01
In the event of a declared water emergency, the County has no formal water- conservation plan for the Waterfront Park. Fact: The County has reduced the daily water consumption of the fountains and associated reflecting pools by reducing the fountain operating hours. Fact: The County has replaced the original filters for the treated fountain water with a more efficient, reliable, and less water-intensive filtration system. Fact: There are additional potable water conservation measures (low-use la...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
, a lack of clear understanding of the nature of the transactions by multiple offices and departments led to the provision of replacement bins without the existence of a formal citywide program. See the
F02
The County has not maximized its potable water conservation opportunities at the Waterfront Park. Fact: Total CAC water consumption for the fountains and central plant since May 2014 is 10 million gallons of potable water. Fact: Fountain-only water consumption is not measured.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City Council partially disagrees with the Grand Jury's finding. We agree that the lack of a formal citywide program for low-income, senior, and disabled individuals could lead to inequities. However, the Council is not aware of any intention to create inequities. The purpose of providing the replacement bins was to assist citizens based on need. RECOMMENDATIONS 17-11 THROUGH 17-13 Below are the City Council's responses to Recommendations 17-11 through 17-13:
▶
City of San Diego
May 30, 2017
•
8 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: +1
(+1, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F01
In the event of a declared water emergency, the County has no formal water- conservation plan for the Waterfront Park. Fact: The County has reduced the daily water consumption of the fountains and associated reflecting pools by reducing the fountain operating hours. Fact: The County has replaced the original filters for the treated fountain water with a more efficient, reliable, and less water-intensive filtration system. Fact: There are additional potable water conservation measures (low-use la...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
, the potential change in uses for the NTC properties and the DeAnza Cove site could be negatively impacted if RFPs for leases at those properties were to be issued immediately. Finding 04: Council Policy 700-10 is too rigid and needs revising, and Council Policy 700-12 is outdated, preventing READ officials from making sound leasing decisions that accurately reflect current economic conditions. Response: The City Council agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
Attachment 1 IBA Report 17-10 City Response to San Diego County Grand Jury Report Entitled REAL ESTATE ASSETS DEPARTMENT LEASEHOLD MANA...
F02
The County has not maximized its potable water conservation opportunities at the Waterfront Park. Fact: Total CAC water consumption for the fountains and central plant since May 2014 is 10 million gallons of potable water. Fact: Fountain-only water consumption is not measured.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City Council partially disagrees with the Grand Jury's finding. Resources provided to any City operation must be balanced against many competing urgent citywide priorities. Because of the need for additional resources to efficiently manage the workload, READ's Asset Management Division added two positions in FY 2017, including an Associate Property Agent and a Property Agent. After a period of training, education, and mentoring, the additional staff are now beginning to work on priority assets and toward reducing the number of agreements in holdover status. READ now believes it has adequat...
F03
Insufficient data is available to accurately measure and manage fountain water conservation.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
, a standard time frame for issuing RFPs would not be efficient or reasonable in most instances where RFPs are used. The variety of property types READ manages and unique property circumstances generally lead to timeframes specific to each site. Examples of varying property types include dedicated parks, hotels, museums, and recreational facilities. The unique nature of different properties must be considered to ensure their proper use and disposition. READ did issue a portfolio management plan on May 23, 2016, which reviews the City's overall real estate portfolio, including the operating pla...
▶
County of San Diego
August 14, 2017
• 3 responses
•
Score: +1
(+2, 0, -1)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F01
In the event of a declared water emergency, the County has no formal water- conservation plan for the Waterfront Park. Fact: The County has reduced the daily water consumption of the fountains and associated reflecting pools by reducing the fountain operating hours. Fact: The County has replaced the original filters for the treated fountain water with a more efficient, reliable, and less water-intensive filtration system. Fact: There are additional potable water conservation measures (low-use la...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Chief Administrative Officer agrees with this finding. A water conservation plan has not been prepared for Waterfront Park. However, water conservation was incorporated into the design of the park through the use of drought-tolerant plant species, expanses of decomposed granite surfacing (requires no water) and the use of a smart-irrigation system.
F02
The County has not maximized its potable water conservation opportunities at the Waterfront Park. Fact: Total CAC water consumption for the fountains and central plant since May 2014 is 10 million gallons of potable water. Fact: Fountain-only water consumption is not measured.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The Chief Administrative Officer disagrees with this finding. The Waterfront Park design optimized water conservation in landscaping and recreational fountain recirculation and filtration.
F03
Insufficient data is available to accurately measure and manage fountain water conservation.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Chief Administrative Officer agrees with this finding. At the time the park was constructed a water meter was not installed on the water line serving the park's fountains. Thus, there was no ability to measure the amount of water that was being used in the fountains. In March of this year, a dedicated meter was installed to measure fountain water usage. Moving forward the County will be able to measure the amount of water being used by the fountains. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2016/2017 Grand Jury recommends that the San Diego County Chief Administrative Officer: 17-04: Prepare an emergency droug...
▶
County of San Diego
May 25, 2017
•
4 pages
• 4 responses
•
Score: 0
(+2, 0, -2)
View Details ▾
4 responses to findings and recommendations
F01
In the event of a declared water emergency, the County has no formal water- conservation plan for the Waterfront Park. Fact: The County has reduced the daily water consumption of the fountains and associated reflecting pools by reducing the fountain operating hours. Fact: The County has replaced the original filters for the treated fountain water with a more efficient, reliable, and less water-intensive filtration system. Fact: There are additional potable water conservation measures (low-use la...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Chief Administrative Officer agrees with this finding.
F02
The County has not maximized its potable water conservation opportunities at the Waterfront Park. Fact: Total CAC water consumption for the fountains and central plant since May 2014 is 10 million gallons of potable water. Fact: Fountain-only water consumption is not measured.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The Chief Administrative Officer disagrees with this finding. The Waterfront Park design optimized water conservation in landscaping and recreational fountain recirculation and filtration.
F03
Insufficient data is available to accurately measure and manage fountain water conservation.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Chief Administrative Officer agrees with this finding. RECOMMENDATIONS BY NUMBER 17-04: Prepare an emergency drought-response plan for the Waterfront Park that reduces the current recreational operating hours of the fountain system and turns off the fountains when not in use for recreation (ornamental mode). The plan should be invoked at any time the City Department of Public Works declares a water emergency that restricts residential water consumption and ornamental fountain operation. Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. Explanation: During t...
17-04
Prepare an emergency drought-response plan for the Waterfront Park
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. Explanation: During the declared water emergency of 2015-16, the County remained in compliance with City of San Diego conservation requirements as applied at the Waterfront Park. In the future, should the City of San Diego require actions to be implemented in response to a declared water emergency, the County will continue to comply with the City of San Diego's conservation requirements as
those requirements are applicable to the County at the Waterfront Park. In addition, the County has voluntarily implemented water con...
▶
San Diego City Council
October 23, 2017
•
7 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: +2
(+2, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F01
In the event of a declared water emergency, the County has no formal water- conservation plan for the Waterfront Park. Fact: The County has reduced the daily water consumption of the fountains and associated reflecting pools by reducing the fountain operating hours. Fact: The County has replaced the original filters for the treated fountain water with a more efficient, reliable, and less water-intensive filtration system. Fact: There are additional potable water conservation measures (low-use la...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City Council agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
F02
The County has not maximized its potable water conservation opportunities at the Waterfront Park. Fact: Total CAC water consumption for the fountains and central plant since May 2014 is 10 million gallons of potable water. Fact: Fountain-only water consumption is not measured.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City Council partially disagrees with the Grand Jury's finding. Although costs spent on election campaigns can be high, financial backing from special-interest groups or others is not required. Groups that wish to support candidates can do so in compliance with elections laws. <b>
F03
Insufficient data is available to accurately measure and manage fountain water conservation.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City Council agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
▶
Supplemental to Response from County of San Diego
December 05, 2017
•
5 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Supplemental to Response from County of San Diego
December 05, 2017
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.