📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Los Angeles County Grand Jury • 2016-2017

15. The Sustainability Principle in Governance

16 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 6 findings

F1 Page 201
Examples of Los Angeles County Sustainability Successes and Need for Coordination There are many examples within Los Angeles County of the successful adoption of the sustainability principle in governance. For this report we examined the plans of four cities. Each has formal plan documents that define the areas of sustainability they address and provide measurable goals. These goals are regularly evaluated to determine progress and allow corrective action. The goals of sustainability plans are applied to other government plans and actions for implementation. The CGJ endorses the current plans of Santa Monica, Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Glendale. Other governmental entities may also have plans. Because of the disparate paths to sustainability followed by the cities, there are some inconsistencies in these plans (Appendix 1).
F2
Sustainability Encouragement from the State The State of California has offered significant support for sustainability.38 Prime examples are in the state’s legislation encouraging the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions and increasing renewable energy sources. There are many more specific cases in which the state has acted to facilitate sustainability practices.
F3 Page 201
Foundation for Sustainability Principle is Not Firm The CGJ found that the plans are not built upon a strong foundation. We believe this exposes the plans to legal and political challenges that otherwise could be avoided. Lacking a strong foundation limits how enforcement can be performed. An example demonstrating this is that the City of Los Angeles’ pLAn relies on Mayor Garcetti’s intention to include sustainability goal performance in the personnel evaluations of his managers. While this can be effective for the City of Los Angeles and its current mayor, there is no assurance that the next mayor will be as active in favor of sustainability.
F4 Page 201
Differences between Federal and California Sustainability Policies The Federal government is in the process of changing its policies regarding sustainability. A recent example is the setting aside of the Clean Power Plan executive order.39 40 The County of Los Angeles’ support for sustainability may be challenged where it depends upon Federal collaboration. 38 https://www.kcet.org/redefine/lots-of-new-environmental-laws-in-california 39 “Will sustainability survive a Trump presidency” - http://www.tgdaily.com/science/will-sustainability-survive- a-trump-presidency 40 https://www.theguardian.com › Environment › Trump administration 178 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT
F5 Page 202
The Climate Change Threat Has Not Caused “Emergency” Action in the County of Los Angeles The warnings on the results of humankind-caused climate change are daunting.41 “Emergency” local programs that deal specifically with reducing greenhouse gases may be appropriate even while complete sustainability plans are in development.
F6
Successful Drought Response but Needs Follow Up As discussed in Section II, the recent drought in California has caused a set of emergency response programs to reduce water consumption throughout Los Angeles County. This is a positive example of emergency actions taken on a sustainability issue. However, because Southern California has a persistent semi-arid climate, the temporary drought actions taken are appropriate as long-term policies. In addition, because of the large amounts of energy required to import or desalinize water, their extensive use may not be sustainable. V

Recommendations 17