June 15, 2016
Dear Quality of Life Coalition,
We are in receipt of your QOL Opposition Statement dated “FINAL June 13, 2016.”
We appreciate the sincere efforts of all the organizations in the Coalition to move the San Diego region in the direction of healthier, more resilient, climate-responsible policies and infrastructure investments that improve the quality of life for residents across all socio-economic levels. We share that goal. We also recognize that SANDAG’s proposed ballot measure is not the only vehicle for progressive movement in the region, nor does SANDAG have the legal authority or mandate to address all of the issues that your coalition supports.
So it is frustrating that we have not been able to come together and recognize where real and substantive progress has been made, and to capture those changes to ensure that progress continues. Most recently, in reading the examples you cite, we are puzzled. The draft ordinance has evolved, in part due to your advocacy, and addresses all six of your concerns. We have cited the relevant page numbers within the draft proposed Ordinance for your reference. As you know, if the Measure is passed by the Voters, it must be enacted as written.
1. “There is no commitment to creating pathways into good, middle-class careers in construction with skilled training and good benefits like family healthcare and pension retirement through a Project labor Agreement.”
Please see Section 22 B, which states: “The Commission hereby establishes a goal to use 80 to 100 percent San Diego County workers on the construction of public works projects funded by Net Revenue, where allowed under applicable law. SANDAG shall develop the implementation procedures for this subsection B by the operative date of the Ordinance. The procedures shall, among other things, set forth a process to ensure compliance with state and federal law regarding the need for adequate competition and worker availability. In accordance with California law, SANDAG shall only contract with responsible bidders and proposers, and prevailing wages shall be paid and apprenticeship ratios shall be met on all public works projects constructed with Net Revenues.”
The Federal Government does not allow Project Labor Agreements. There is a Demonstration project in Los Angeles using a PLA with Federal dollars, but as of the writing of this Measure, it has not concluded and the policy prohibition remains intact. The intent of both Transnet Measures and this proposed Measure is to leverage our Net Revenues with both State and Federal funds, which are most usually used together on our various projects. If the Federal government’s policy on PLAs changes, we can address that on contracts as they come before the Board.
An earlier proposal by the SANDAG Board to include an additional apprenticeship program was rejected by labor and contractors because, they told us, they don’t spend the apprenticeship dollars they currently have, so it was removed as requested.
2. “It would negatively impact our most vulnerable communities, taxing them for freeway expansion projects that worsen air pollution, public health and traffic congestion in their neighborhoods.”
Presumably you are speaking about SR 94. Please note the asterisk in the Ordinance under the page titled “Managed Lanes, HOV Lanes, and HOV Connectors”. It states “Improvements in the SR 94 Corridor are contingent on the outcome of an environmental review process underway at the time the Ordinance was drafted.” In other words, if the Pilot Program is successful, the SR 94 Corridor Improvements would not occur. If the Pilot Program is successful, improvements to the shoulder of the highway will most likely be needed. This Measure has the flexibility to dedicate funds to that improvement.
If the Pilot Program is not successful and the proposed improvements were to move forward at some time, this and every project in the Regional Plan must go through its own project-level environmental review to ensure that potential impacts are identified and mitigated.
Already, however, the EIR for the Regional Plan shows a detailed analysis of the health risks and GHG emissions profile over time, and it shows they are going down.
The SR 94 is not in the Priority Corridor program, meaning that these improvements would not be done in the first 15 or so years. The anticipation is that all Net Revenues in the Highway and Transit categories of the Measure will be spent on Priority Corridor projects (most of which are Transit) for the first 15 years at least.
Air pollution is caused, among other things, by idling carsand trucks so adding capacity to a roadway in a strategic manner where congestion is worst could reduce idling, and thus less air pollution.
In our view, we see that the most vulnerable communities will benefit the most from the 42% Transit dollars in this Measure. Trolley frequencies and capacity and the entire new Purple line will benefit these communities. It could be said that the rest of the Region is subsidizing these lines for the most vulnerable communities. Everyone will be paying a tax for improvements to existing lines and construction on the new Purple line. It is unlikely many of our residents will be using them much, but for the good of the overall region, we are strongly in favor of these improvements.
California has the second lowest “regressive tax” in the United States. Sales tax in California is assessed on fewer items than in any other state in the Union except one. While a half-cent tax will incur more cost per person, it is estimated to be $40 per yearon average, less than $4 per month.
3. “It has no mechanism to link funding with projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions to meet state targets, achieve the goals of the City of San Diego Climate Action Plan, and help stabilize the climate.”
As the attached chart demonstrates, passage of the proposed Ordinance will result in lower GHG emissions over time.
The City of San Diego will receive approximately $29 million annually to help them meet their Climate Action Planfrom the SANDAG measure as their share of the local fund allocation. These funds will be available to invest as the City of San Diego chooses to meet its CAP goals. (Please see Section 6B1—5).
There are 17 other Cities and the County who make up SANDAG. Each City is responsible for meeting their own Climate Action Plan targets and will also receive a share of local discretionary funding that can be used in a variety of projects that also help reduce GHG emissions.
The entire Measure is not designed for just the City of San Diego and the projects in the Measure are not the only means through which the City of San Diego can meet their CAP goals.
Of the universe of all sources of GHG emissions in the region, SANDAG is responsible for 3%: those emissions from cars and light duty trucks. Our Transportation Plans do meet and in fact exceed state targets as mandated in SB 375 per the California Air Resources Board. Stabilizing the climate cannot be achieved by reducing the emissions from just 3% of all sources. However, passing this Measure will help us to further reduce our GHG emissions as demonstrated by the attached chart.
4. “It does not provide adequate guarantees for effective, equitable, affordable, substantial mass transit construction, operations and maintenance that would shift people over time from cars to mass transit and active transportation.”
Forty-two percent of $18 billion will go very far to creating a mass transit system that will be competitive with single vehicle occupancy. The approximately $7.5 billion dedicated to transit as matching dollars, can leverage almost $15 billion worth of projects. This includes both capital investments and service improvements to increase frequency. Local funding allocations can also be used for Youth Opportunity Passes to encourage use of transit by students.
Active transportation dollars total 3% of the $18 billion, or one-half billion dollars worth of projects, and will be implemented annually.
Without this Measure, these projects won’t be built, service won’t be as frequent, and we will be guaranteed a transit system that doesn’t compete.
5. “It does not fund vital stormwater and water infrastructure projects,”
We have been clear that this Measure provides funding for water quality ie stormwater issues, not water supply. Water supply is up to the County Water Authority, not SANDAG.
Currently, each city is responsible to fund and implement stormwater cleanup from projects and other sources. This Measure provides money for each city for stormwater cleanup as an Eligible use of Local Funds. Section 22 D states “All new transportation infrastructure projects in the Regional Corridors and Local Infrastructure Projects Programs, or major reconstruction projects in those Programs, funded by Net Revenues provided under this Ordinance shall accommodate water quality improvements and/or stormwater conveyance facilities that meet or exceed water quality standards…” This applies not only to the projects SANDAG is building, but to the projects cities build using these funds. Cities struggle to find these dollars on their own, and it has become increasingly difficult to meet these standards which become more stringent every year.
6. “It fails to provide the adequate funding essential for conservation, open space and active transportation.”
The proposed Measure will raise over twice the amount for open space conservation and management than Transnet 2 did, or $2 billion which is11.1% of Net Revenues. With half the amount that this Measure is proposing, SANDAG has so far been able to preserve 38 properties or 8,300 acres of open space and sensitive habitat. This is seven times the size of Balboa Park and many times larger than our two cities combined.
Furthermore, the proposed Measure will help us realize the long-range goals of our region’s local cities’ General Plans to preserve 55% of our land as open space by 2050. The intent of this Measure is to acquire, preserve and maintain 25,000 acres of habitat.
Without the funds from this Measure, individual cities will be responsible for identifying and fully funding their obligations under their Multiple Species Conservation Programs and associated Federal and State Endangered Species permits, and will struggle to find resources.
Active transportation projects will receive 3% of Net Revenues, or a half-billion dollars. Please see Section 8 A, B and C which describes the many bike and pedestrian projects and programs envisioned in the Measure. The intent is, as stated in Section 8B, “that these funds be used to match federal, state, local and private funding to maximize the number of improvements to be implemented.”
Your statement does not indicate what WOULD be adequate funding, or where you would propose that the funds be acquired.
No matter what our preferences and priorities, the reality is that any Measure needs a 2/3 majority vote to pass, and polling consistently indicates that without funding for local roads and some highway improvements, the whole effort fails and we get nothing. This Measure will provide more money than ever before dedicated and assured for transit, active transportation and open space conservation as well as discretionary local funds to meet climate action goals. We are unable to imagine a realistic scenario that would do more and have enough public support to actually be enacted.
So we urge you to read the draft ordinance carefully. Instead of looking at what isn’t there, look at what IS there. Politics is the art of the possible, and to us, the limited amount of investment in highway projects is justified (e.g., fixing the I-5/I-78 intersection to reduce back-ups), and more than offset by the extensive commitments to your, and our, priorities.
We strongly believe that this Measure will greatly improve the quality of life for all in the San Diego Region. We appreciate your contributions to help “push” the Board to make it a better Measure. Our hope in outlining above the specific responses to your six concerns is that we will have demonstrated that we have been responsive and that we are more in agreement in our visions for the San Diego region than not.
If we thought voting No on this Measure would improve the quality of life of residents or reduce the region’s GHG emissions, we would do so. But the facts show otherwise.
We ask that you join us in our support of this Measure that we strongly believe, based on the facts outlined in the Measure and highlighted in this letter, will improve our quality of life, reduce GHG emissions of the region, increase the number of transit riders and those that walk or bike to get around, increase open space and improve water quality.
Very sincerely,
Council member Lesa Heebner, Solana Beach
Deputy Mayor Lisa Shaffer, Encinitas
Please note that SANDAG far exceeds CARB targets in 2020 and 2035, and most importantly, SANDAG’s RTP performs better than that of Los Angeles’ (SCAG), the city often cited as doing so much for Transit. For comparisons sake, these are per capita to account for differences in population in each region.
2020 SB 375 Targets and Projected GHG Emissions Reductions
2035 SB 375 Targets and Projected GHG Emissions Reductions
The Chart below reflects TOTAL emissions from the RTP. Even while population continues to grow, GHG emissions continue their downward trajectory.
1