San Diego County Grand Jury • 2007-2008

Sandag: How Much Growth is Sustainable?

Published: May 21, 2008 19 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 17 findings

F01
While construction delays in highway 76 continued, many housing developments using this highway were built without the transportation infrastructure to support them.
No recommendations for this finding
F1
To point out that rapid growth has surpassed many areas of the infrastructure carrying capacity of the region. While SANDAG is a great asset to the region, it does not continue obtaining opinion surveys of what the citizens of the region think of the growing infrastructure deficit that growth has caused. Nor does it answer the question: Is there an optimal population for our region within the constraints of water, power, police, schools and other infrastructure necessities? _____________________________________________________________________1 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) 2. To examine the funding for regional infrastructure maintenance. In many cases the cities of San Diego County have borrowed money or issued bonds counting on future growth and property taxes to pay today’s infrastructure maintenance debts. The mayors and council members of these cities make up most of the SANDAG Board and make the final decisions of SANDAG. These decisions box us in by creating a cycle that works only if more growth continues forever (no light at the end of this tunnel). Plans need to be realistic reflecting managed growth and respecting existing infrastructure constraints rather than borrowing on future growth.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Developed a Smart Growth Concept Map which identifies areas throughout the region that would link smart growth land uses and transportation infrastructure.
F02
When the time frame delays and cost increase of the Sprinter are applied to the existing and future SANDAG projects, the infrastructure deficit will increase dramatically. Fact: SANDAG has not published a combined infrastructure assessment, or considered one in its plans to be provided to the public for the region. The figures for each element of infrastructure can be found in several different reports, but not in a single overall assessment format.
No recommendations for this finding
F03
An easy to read scorecard by city or supervisorial district for unincorporated areas showing the population and the infrastructure element figures should be developed. These assessments will show infrastructure figures such as public safety or hospital beds, so everyone can tell if development (both employment centers and housing tracks) can be supported. Fact: SANDAG is often criticized in the press for project delays and not building more highway lanes or roads, as many citizens want less spent on public transportation. SANDAG is caught in the middle between what the state mandates (more mass transit) and what the public wants (more lanes).
No recommendations for this finding
F3
To examine the level to which the SANDAG Board reflects the concerns of the regional citizens they represent. Presently, SANDAG Board Members are mostly mayors, city council members or other regional representatives. The decisions made by the board are very important to the region. Those interviewed admit the constituents that elected them, seldom ask how they voted for an issue at SANDAG. Few even realize they sit on the SANDAG Board.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
SANDAG has made changes to its governance structure; two San Diego County representatives - one representing the incorporated areas and another representing the unincorporated areas of the county - sit on the SANDAG Board of Directors. The 16 recipients named in the finding are Carlsbad, Chula Vista, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, MTS, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, County of San Diego, Solana Beach and Vista. Office of Audits & Advisory Services County of San Diego FY 2007-08 GRAND JURY AUDIT OF THE SAN DIEGO March 2008 ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Report No. A08-024 FINAL REPORT 9
F04
It may not be possible to pave our way out of congestion; other cities have tried it for years with little success. By approving managed growth first in order to allow the mass transportation infrastructure to catch up, SANDAG will be required to concentrate on the new mandates from the state, and look closely at water and power needs. Fact: Cutbacks on Quality of Life are being made due to large increases in regional population. Recently one local city cancelled an annual holiday fair that had gone on for many years and another city stated that the jazz lawn concerts are getting too large and need to be reduced. A newspaper article tells of large gatherings at regional parks by charities and others that are having a negative impact on the park’s neighborhood. Additionally, beach goers and surfers are complaining about having to pay to park at the beach.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
To provide findings of a limited scope audit of SANDAG performed by the San Diego County Auditor and Controller Office at the request of the Grand Jury. PROCEDURES Members of the Grand Jury: • Viewed a presentation by the SANDAG Executive Director and staff. • Attended over 30 of the SANDAG working group and board meetings. • Reviewed many SANDAG published reports. • Interviewed current and former board members and employees of SANDAG. • Requested and reviewed an audit of SANDAG by the County Chief of Audits. (Attached) DISCUSSION 1 INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY In recent years this region has experienced unprecedented growth from both internal and external sources. Like many regions we have a sizeable undocumented population that contributes to and exacerbates our infrastructure growth. The local Governments escalated this growth in a “build it and they will come” philosophy. It was assumed that government would work out the growing infrastructure constraints or carrying capacity later. With our limited regional constraints, we may not have that luxury. It is time to take a closer look and manage our growth better. If we continue to invite growth and increase the infrastructure deficit, we will continue to lower our quality of life. As Edward Abbey stated: “Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.” Examples of how infrastructure growth has slowed are: the State Route 76 expansion and the Sprinter train. The SR 76 project will change a 2-lane road into a 4-lane road _____________________________________________________________________2 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) between I-5 and I-15. A western section was completed several years ago and now could be widened to 6 lanes. The remaining 10 miles of the conversion from 2 to 4 lanes was included during the 1987 Transnet sales tax plan. While the projected completion plan for this dangerous stretch of road is 2014, because of money constraints and priorities, there is an extended plan being considered within SANDAG, which would move completion to 2020. That would mean an improvement to a 10-mile stretch of road will have taken 33 years. Even if the present completion plans of 2014 holds, it will still take 27 years. In the meantime, accidents and fatalities will continue on the old route. The Sprinter train also goes between I- 15 and I-5 that took 20 years from planning to completion. Not only has the schedule slipped many times over the years, but the cost estimate has gone from a vision of $20 mil in 1986 to $352 mil in 2003 and $477 million recently. If we know the carrying capacity or peak population density of our region, we can manage development growth. This will allow the supporting infrastructure to grow in unison with development and not behind it. This would include development of employment centers (industrial parks, universities and large office buildings) and large housing tracts. Infrastructure carrying capacity is a measure of what an area can support, including the knowledge of whether the present population and/or any new development has or will have utilities, water, hospital beds, police, schools, fire protection, transportation, etc they require. It should be noted that while SANDAG does not have direct control or authority of land use within the cities and county, SANDAG board members do. But SANDAG should have a role in informing the citizens of the region by letting them know with an easily understood assessment or scorecard if the total infrastructure by district or city has the ability (carrying capacity) to support both existing and pending growth. The scorecard would go a long way in gaining confidence from the citizens of the region for SANDAG. Recently the state passed mandates under AB-32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 that will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by promoting mass transit and providing for more homes closer to work locations. This will have strong positive effects on our growth patterns, environment and infrastructure. SANDAG should take credit for embracing these mandates and include the mandated requirements in existing plans. To be more responsive, SANDAG should announce that it is going to promote GHG reduction, manage our growth, pay attention to the existing quality of life as well as the carrying capacity of what our current infrastructure can support. Presenting an image of a slow, well-managed region, living and growing within its means, would make anyone proud to live here. _____________________________________________________________________3 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) FACTS / FINDINGS Fact: The SANDAG projects of Highway 76 and the Sprinter train are examples that contribute to our present infrastructure deficit. Finding #01: While construction delays in highway 76 continued, many housing developments using this highway were built without the transportation infrastructure to support them. Finding #02: When the time frame delays and cost increase of the Sprinter are applied to the existing and future SANDAG projects, the infrastructure deficit will increase dramatically. Fact: SANDAG has not published a combined infrastructure assessment, or considered one in its plans to be provided to the public for the region. The figures for each element of infrastructure can be found in several different reports, but not in a single overall assessment format. Finding #03: An easy to read scorecard by city or supervisorial district for unincorporated areas showing the population and the infrastructure element figures should be developed. These assessments will show infrastructure figures such as public safety or hospital beds, so everyone can tell if development (both employment centers and housing tracks) can be supported. Fact: SANDAG is often criticized in the press for project delays and not building more highway lanes or roads, as many citizens want less spent on public transportation. SANDAG is caught in the middle between what the state mandates (more mass transit) and what the public wants (more lanes). Finding #04: It may not be possible to pave our way out of congestion; other cities have tried it for years with little success. By approving managed growth first in order to allow the mass transportation infrastructure to catch up, SANDAG will be required to concentrate on the new mandates from the state, and look closely at water and power needs. Fact: Cutbacks on Quality of Life are being made due to large increases in regional population. Recently one local city cancelled an annual holiday fair that had gone on for many years and another city stated that the jazz lawn concerts are getting too large and need to be reduced. A newspaper article tells of large gatherings at regional parks by charities and others that are having a negative impact on the park’s neighborhood. Additionally, beach goers and surfers are complaining about having to pay to park at the beach. Finding #05: The facts above are examples of how growth without enough infrastructures in place will affect the quality of life. _____________________________________________________________________4 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 2 BOXED IN Most citizens agree that new growth should pay for most if not all of new development infrastructure needed. Good government budget practices allow borrowing for large capital improvements, but not to pay for day-to-day maintenance. Much of our maintenance on existing infrastructure has been delayed in favor of new development infrastructure, which limits funding to pay for present problems. So we box ourselves in by borrowing from the future. Then the only choice is to keep growing to pay for the required maintenance of today. In the past, SANDAG has been fortunate enough to receive grants and allocations from both state and federal government as bailouts. However, both state and federal governments are presently cutting many areas. Because of the problems in our infrastructure deficit, our ability to provide solutions to other problems such as a larger regional airport, providing needed school buildings and hospitals, increasing our wastewater treatment facilities and finding the water we will need tomorrow at an affordable price is decreased. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: At the end of 2007 the board of SANDAG considered two choices with respect to the Regional Transportation Plan Funding: a Revenue Constrained Scenario of $41 billion or a Reasonably Expected Revenue Scenario of $57 billion. Finding #06: The region in the past has been able to attract funds and grants from many different sources. If these additional funds are not found, it appears that a $16 billion adjustment is going to be needed. Fact: Acceptance of competitive fixed prices is prevalent by SANDAG and most government agencies in the region. Competitive fixed prices are accepted as the best price obtainable, if they are close to the budgeted amount. Regional road prices and cost elements are not compared to the prices paid by our neighboring counties. Finding #07: Prices for construction have recently come down from past prices and SANDAG believes it is due to the potential for a recession. However, the costs of cement, rock and steel have not come down. It appears that no one is looking into the question of whether we paid too much in the recent past or should today’s prices be even less than quoted. Fact: Currently there are three mass transit systems in place currently in the county: Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District and the Metro Liner. Finding #08: If the current projected growth estimates are allowed; a far-reaching mass transit system to all corners of the county is needed. Combining rail systems and expanding train lines would be a good start. _____________________________________________________________________5 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 3 SANDAG BOARD While they are all elected officials, SANDAG Board members are not elected to that position. The board is made up of two members from the Board of Supervisors, two from the City of San Diego and one each from the other seventeen cities. While the members mostly set aside rivalries between cities and try to be responsible, they are limited in two areas: 1) for the most part they individually have not had any professional training in planning, and 2) they have to consider the constituents who elected them first and the needs of the region second. Since the board members were elected to govern for only a slice of the entire region, when the region needs something like an additional rail line, a power plant or an aggregate mine, the answer is too often “Not in My Back Yard.” The region, as a whole, has to suffer and pay extra for these political decisions. The most recent TransNet sales tax extension was estimated to fund much more than it probably will cover. Because sales tax revenues have recently declined, the SANDAG board is searching for a new income base to support present and future projects. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: SANDAG has started a recent study on Quality of Life (QofL) issues, which includes beach sand replenishment, quality of water, mass transit and wastewater run off. Finding #09: These QofL issues have long been with us and have been addressed by the area cities and county. To look at them regionally will be a new challenge for the board members. Fact: Many of the cities use terms of “Build Out” and “Open Space”, while a consistent definition is hard to find. We see statements in the press from elected officials using these terms and they sound something like growth will stop at “build out” and “open space” is to be left natural. One city classifies I-5 as open space. Finding #10: SANDAG should provide better definitions of these terms for the public to understand. DISCUSSION 4 COUNTY AUDIT We requested and received a limited-scope audit report from the San Diego County Auditor & Comptroller Office. The audit revealed that some internal controls need to be strengthened, tracking procedures should be refined, prior audit findings are not tracked and made a permanent record, and the segregation of functions need to be improved. The facts and findings below are also addressed and expanded in the attached Audit. Fact: SANDAG’s financial system is owned and administered by Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) without an up to date agreement outlining the use of this system. Finding #11: Since MTS is a recipient of grants from SANDAG, there is a potential conflict of interest for MTS to administer the financial system. _____________________________________________________________________6 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) Fact: Many different excel spreadsheets are used to track grants and prepare monthly reports back to the grantor. Input to these spreadsheets is not automated to transfer data from expenditure systems. Finding #12: With the many separate spreadsheets needed for the various grants, the reliance factor decreases. SANDAG was not able to ensure that access lists to these reporting systems are updated as needed to reflect the current user environment, or that these lists are reviewed periodically. Fact: Several periodic audits are both required and performed on the financial records of SANDAG. An ongoing tracking system for the various findings has not been established. Finding #13: When the auditor asked for the findings and recommendations for the past three years, SANDAG cited “they had no findings except one which was resolved.” The auditor later discovered findings from audits and reviews still in process of resolution. Fact: The duties of receiving, processing and depositing checks are not adequately segregated to ensure proper safeguarding. Finding #14: A sole mail clerk opens and distributes all the incoming mail for SANDAG over four floors daily. This includes incoming checks. The auditor found that unendorsed checks could be left unattended in the mail clerk’s cubicle.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
SANDAG Plays a More Prominent Role Than Most Other Councils of Governments…
F05
The facts above are examples of how growth without enough infrastructures in place will affect the quality of life. _____________________________________________________________________4 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 2 BOXED IN Most citizens agree that new growth should pay for most if not all of new development infrastructure needed. Good government budget practices allow borrowing for large capital improvements, but not to pay for day-to-day maintenance. Much of our maintenance on existing infrastructure has been delayed in favor of new development infrastructure, which limits funding to pay for present problems. So we box ourselves in by borrowing from the future. Then the only choice is to keep growing to pay for the required maintenance of today. In the past, SANDAG has been fortunate enough to receive grants and allocations from both state and federal government as bailouts. However, both state and federal governments are presently cutting many areas. Because of the problems in our infrastructure deficit, our ability to provide solutions to other problems such as a larger regional airport, providing needed school buildings and hospitals, increasing our wastewater treatment facilities and finding the water we will need tomorrow at an affordable price is decreased. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: At the end of 2007 the board of SANDAG considered two choices with respect to the Regional Transportation Plan Funding: a Revenue Constrained Scenario of $41 billion or a Reasonably Expected Revenue Scenario of $57 billion.
No recommendations for this finding
F06
The region in the past has been able to attract funds and grants from many different sources. If these additional funds are not found, it appears that a $16 billion adjustment is going to be needed. Fact: Acceptance of competitive fixed prices is prevalent by SANDAG and most government agencies in the region. Competitive fixed prices are accepted as the best price obtainable, if they are close to the budgeted amount. Regional road prices and cost elements are not compared to the prices paid by our neighboring counties.
No recommendations for this finding
F07
Prices for construction have recently come down from past prices and SANDAG believes it is due to the potential for a recession. However, the costs of cement, rock and steel have not come down. It appears that no one is looking into the question of whether we paid too much in the recent past or should today’s prices be even less than quoted. Fact: Currently there are three mass transit systems in place currently in the county: Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District and the Metro Liner.
No recommendations for this finding
F08
If the current projected growth estimates are allowed; a far-reaching mass transit system to all corners of the county is needed. Combining rail systems and expanding train lines would be a good start. _____________________________________________________________________5 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 3 SANDAG BOARD While they are all elected officials, SANDAG Board members are not elected to that position. The board is made up of two members from the Board of Supervisors, two from the City of San Diego and one each from the other seventeen cities. While the members mostly set aside rivalries between cities and try to be responsible, they are limited in two areas: 1) for the most part they individually have not had any professional training in planning, and 2) they have to consider the constituents who elected them first and the needs of the region second. Since the board members were elected to govern for only a slice of the entire region, when the region needs something like an additional rail line, a power plant or an aggregate mine, the answer is too often “Not in My Back Yard.” The region, as a whole, has to suffer and pay extra for these political decisions. The most recent TransNet sales tax extension was estimated to fund much more than it probably will cover. Because sales tax revenues have recently declined, the SANDAG board is searching for a new income base to support present and future projects. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: SANDAG has started a recent study on Quality of Life (QofL) issues, which includes beach sand replenishment, quality of water, mass transit and wastewater run off.
No recommendations for this finding
F09
These QofL issues have long been with us and have been addressed by the area cities and county. To look at them regionally will be a new challenge for the board members. Fact: Many of the cities use terms of “Build Out” and “Open Space”, while a consistent definition is hard to find. We see statements in the press from elected officials using these terms and they sound something like growth will stop at “build out” and “open space” is to be left natural. One city classifies I-5 as open space.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
SANDAG should provide better definitions of these terms for the public to understand. DISCUSSION 4 COUNTY AUDIT We requested and received a limited-scope audit report from the San Diego County Auditor & Comptroller Office. The audit revealed that some internal controls need to be strengthened, tracking procedures should be refined, prior audit findings are not tracked and made a permanent record, and the segregation of functions need to be improved. The facts and findings below are also addressed and expanded in the attached Audit. Fact: SANDAG’s financial system is owned and administered by Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) without an up to date agreement outlining the use of this system.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10
Economic Factors Influence Land Developments
F11
Since MTS is a recipient of grants from SANDAG, there is a potential conflict of interest for MTS to administer the financial system. _____________________________________________________________________6 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) Fact: Many different excel spreadsheets are used to track grants and prepare monthly reports back to the grantor. Input to these spreadsheets is not automated to transfer data from expenditure systems.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11
SANDAG Encourages Multifamily Housing, But Few Follow
F12
With the many separate spreadsheets needed for the various grants, the reliance factor decreases. SANDAG was not able to ensure that access lists to these reporting systems are updated as needed to reflect the current user environment, or that these lists are reviewed periodically. Fact: Several periodic audits are both required and performed on the financial records of SANDAG. An ongoing tracking system for the various findings has not been established.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12
Some Local Agency Plans Emphasize Retail and Low-Density Housing
F13
When the auditor asked for the findings and recommendations for the past three years, SANDAG cited “they had no findings except one which was resolved.” The auditor later discovered findings from audits and reviews still in process of resolution. Fact: The duties of receiving, processing and depositing checks are not adequately segregated to ensure proper safeguarding.
Related Recommendations (1)
R13
Many Factors Counter SANDAG’s Effectiveness In Influencing Land Use Transportation
F14
A sole mail clerk opens and distributes all the incoming mail for SANDAG over four floors daily. This includes incoming checks. The auditor found that unendorsed checks could be left unattended in the mail clerk’s cubicle.
Related Recommendations (1)
R14
SANDAG Is the Primary Transportation Entity In the Region

Additional Recommendations 15

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

Commendations 30