Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for being here. We're just going to wait a couple more minutes and we'll get started. Thank you.

We'll be right back. Thank you.

Okay, I will now call the June 10th, 2026 San Diego County Board of Supervisors Land Use Legislative Meeting, Flood Control District Meeting, Housing Authority Meeting, and Sanitation District Meeting to order. I would like to welcome Tenant Commissioner Bianca Berry to today's meeting. Ryan, please call the roll for today's session.

Thank you, Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp. Noting for the record that Chair Lawson-Reimer and Tenant Commissioner Higgins will be absent from today's meeting. Supervisor Anderson.

Here.

Supervisor Desmond.

Here.

Chair Pro Tem McGeary.

Here.

Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp.

Here.

And Tenant Commissioner Berry.

Here. Great. Okay, so before we begin this meeting, I just need to take a moment to address the House Rules. Public engagement is the cornerstone of transparent and accountable government, and these Board of Supervisors meetings are one of the primary venues where all San Diegans can make their voices heard the county is committed to a work environment free from unlawful discrimination and harassment including sexual racial religious age disability or any other form of discrimination or harassment under the board's rules speakers are not allowed to use loud shouting threatening impertinent slanderous profane or abusive language to any member of the board, staff, or the general public. Additionally, all remarks and questions must remain on topic during the duration of your speaking time and must be addressed to the board and not to county staff. Any speaker who engages in comments that break these rules will be issued a warning. After one warning, you will be asked to leave the chambers for the rest of the meeting. Finally, speakers threatening violence may be reported to law enforcement and removed from the meeting. This is a space for community engagement, deliberation, and progress, not for harassment, violence, and hate. We'll go now to the closed session report. Counsel, is there a report for yesterday's closed session?

Yes, good morning. The Board of Supervisors met in closed session on June 9th, 2026 from 2.20 p.m. to 4.20 p.m. Four board members were present with Chair Lawson-Riemer absent. The board took the following reportable action. On item 21A, Alvarez-Lopez, Floor Flower versus County of San Diego, by a vote of four to zero, the board authorized County Council to file a petition for a writ of mandate to challenge a court order certifying a class of plaintiffs who allege that jail commissary prices constitute an illegal tax. End of report.

Thank you. We will now proceed with non-agenda public communication. This is an opportunity for the public to address the board on subject matters within the board's jurisdiction, but not an item on the meeting agenda. The only action that the board may take is a referral to the chief administrative officer. under the board's rules speakers can only speak once per meeting for non-agenda public communication either at yesterday's general legislative session or today's land use legislative session but not both sessions speakers may select which session to address the board at their own convenience to better facilitate the meeting for non-agenda public comment we will have five speakers in person and then five speakers by phone and the rest of non-agenda public communication will be heard at the end of today's session. Additionally, in accordance with board rules, in order to ensure timely completion of today's agenda, for any discussion item with 10 speakers or more, individuals will have one minute to share their opinion at the Chair's discretion. A reminder that according to Rule 4A, members of the public that are non-English speaking and need interpretation assistance will get twice the allotted time for their comments. And then a final reminder, according to the Board's Rules of Procedures, audience members shall not whistle, clap, stomp, feet, or anything that disrupts the proceedings. If you disrupt the meeting, you'll be given one warning, and after that one warning, If you disrupt the meeting again, you will be directed to leave the chamber for the remainder of the meeting. Ryan, please call the speakers.

Thank you, Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp. We have 12 total requests to speak on matters not listed on the agenda, three individuals in person, and nine requesting to speak by phone. For those that have requested to speak by phone, if you could please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We'll begin with the in-person speakers. As your name is called, please come forward, stand on the arrows until it is your turn to speak at the podium. You'll then have two minutes to address the board. Please begin by stating your name for the record. I'd like to invite for the three individuals, Muhammad Asid, Peter Anderson, and Ronald Asklin.

Good morning. How long I have? Two minutes. Two minutes. Good morning, honorable board. and board member, respected board member. I came in front of you, this is the first time I'm here, as an ex-director of California Mental Health I have served over 37 years of services to the community, to the state, and to the city and the counties. My son was kidnapped back when I was on the board, and he was beaten close to death. I tried to get help for him. I've been faced with so many discrimination It make me sick, make me sick. You know, he paid the big price. They tried to get down my daughter and we have the same thing. They got away with it. I'm not here just to issue this. I need the board to take an action. Anybody violate the guideline of any programs, they need to be terminated. We cannot tolerate discrimination. You know, we live in a country, everybody's different, but we're all the same. You know, we cannot let this happen. Please, you know, my wife has two cancers. And, you know, a social worker came and said, you know what, you are lying. You are faking. All the results are there. And he get away with it. Why? Why? Why there is no, you know, action against this? Plus, I spoke yesterday with the imam of the cultural center and the tragedy that happened to us just last week. My daughter was her first day of helping in the school and she woke up vomiting from the tragedy from the bullets and from the blood and the bodies in there. We need the board to reach out to the community. We are over 200,000 people, 25 centers in this county. Why we are neglected? Why the board doesn't reach to us? I welcome you to come to our center and please be close to this community. We are part of this. Thank you, sir. I'm sorry.

No, your time's up, sir. Thank you. your, your time's up. Board rules is two minutes. Thank you though.

If you have anything, you can give your photo to the clerk and it will, you can pass it. She can pass it around if you prefer.

Thank you.

Good morning. We appreciate this chance to testify before you and hope you take into consideration what we have to say. I'm dr. Peter Anderson the vice chair of the Sierra Club Conservation Committee. I know most of you and the non-agenda item we want to talk about today is the county's lease of County owned land to the west coast tomato growers They use a huge amount of pesticide on their on their crops They have been cited many times for excessive pesticide use Several people have testified before our conservation committee which meets monthly That they have been poisoned and had to go to the hospital and one contracted cancer after being exposed because they live on the periphery of The land lease to the west coast tomato growers so we're asking you to reconsider that contract and In fact, we know that there is an organic farmer that would like to lease that land That wouldn't present that toxic problem for the residents and And and also the toxicity of the fruit being produced there we can do better than that. It's County land We urge you to reconsider that contract and consider alternatives. Thanks for your attention

good morning supervisors I'm doctor ronald asklin conservation chair of the san diego sierra club. We're very concerned about the process used to renew the lease of county owned land to west coast tomato growers. West coast tomato growers failure to disclose settled labor failure regardless of the cases outcome leasing county land to a tenant whose role in stormwater contamination remains unresolved is premature and could violate the county's environmental stewardship duties on three occasions west coast male growers have failed pesticide inspections concerns regarding labor practices water contamination and pesticide usage have not been adequately addressed to the current rfp process We asked the San Diego County Board of Supervisors to require a public hearing before the lease is executed. Leasing publicly owned land carries a public trust responsibility that demands full transparency, rigorous oversight, and meaningful accountability. As Peter mentioned, this is especially important because we have a organic farmer who practices regenerative agriculture that's also interested in leasing the land. You have to repurpose this land, get the toxic pesticides out of there. You can then be producing healthy organic food with county land. Thank you.

Thank you. And we will now hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. Again, in accordance with the board rules, we'll be hearing from the first five callers. The remaining callers will be heard at the conclusion of today's session. When it is your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You will hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments. And we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

Good morning. My name is John Boddorf with CleanEarthForKids.org. I am here again asking why the county is trying to lease land to West Coast tomato growers. They are using highly toxic pesticides next to the already impaired San Luis Rey River. 75% of the pesticides they have used since 2016 are banned in other countries. Legal does not mean safe. The San Luis Rey River supports critical habitats for multiple species of concern. 99% of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers come from fossil fuels, and the continued use of these petrochemicals is a direct threat to the climate and our world. How does giving West Coast tomato growers a land lease support the county's climate action plan and sustainability goals and the MSTP? Also, West Coast tomato growers paid $1 million in 2018 to settle labor violations, yet the county wants to give them a lease, violating county rules and regulations. So again, why is the county trying to give them this lease? Who with the county is gaining something from this? This lease process must be done in public, not some backroom real estate deal. We have emailed each of your offices a 136-page letter detailing the reasons why we oppose the county leasing land to West Coast tomato growers. Please take action and stop the land lease to West Coast tomato doors. Our children's health and future depends on the action that you take today. Thank you from CleanItForKids.org.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

Good morning. My name is Becky Rapp, and today I'd like to voice my support for yesterday's agenda item number 18, new guidelines for ad hoc subcommittees. Increasing transparency in county government is critical. However, I also want to express my disappointment that members of the public who registered to speak on this item were unable to do so because the call-in system was not functioning properly. While I appreciate the technical issue was eventually corrected, it occurred while the board was still discussing the item. Yet those of us who had followed the procedures and registered to participate were not given an opportunity to be heard. When the subject before the board is transparency and public access, every reasonable effort should be made to ensure the public can participate in the discussion. This concern is especially important when viewed in the context of the county's socially equitable cannabis program. The program has been under development for years and involves issues that directly affect public health, public safety, neighborhoods, youth exposure, and county resources. Residents should not have to struggle to understand where recommendations have originated, who participated in shaping them, and what consultants were involved, or what discussions occurred before matters reached the full board. Transparency is most vulnerable at the beginning of the decision-making process, not after recommendations have already been developed. The public deserves access to agendas, meeting materials, recordings, committee membership and consultant reports. If the county is serious about transparency, it must ensure both open government and meaningful public access. This includes making every effort to accommodate public testimony when technical problems arise and ensuring that programs such as the Socially Equitable Cannabis Program are developed in full view of the communities they will impact. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker. The next speaker is Jennifer. You might need to unmute your phone. Okay, we'll come back to you, Jennifer.

Good morning, members of the board. My name is Susan. I'm the California director for non-toxic neighborhoods. I'm here today to urge the board to reject the recommendation toward the lease of the 77-acre Gohome Lake property to West Coast tomato growers and enforce a comprehensive audit and transparency of this bid process. We urge the board to transition this lease to public land to a non-toxic grower that protects our oil, protects our water, and most importantly, our children. Our organization has spent over four years representing residents who endure toxic exposure from West Coast minerals alongside another dozen environmental groups. We have petitioned the sport and matter for several years. Under Board Policy A-97, any selected lessee must meet strict standards of responsibility, trustworthiness, quality, fitness to perform. They fundamentally failed this test on multiple fronts, including labor and environmental stewardship. So are your ordinances and policies just for show? You passed those landmark working family ordinances, yet you pay no attention to the severe labor and workplace violations. You have explicitly ignored formal requests from the labor unions to deny this lease. Furthermore, you established a multi-million dollar office of sustainability that has done absolutely nothing on this issue. At this point, Is the only real goal is to greenwash the public? You release a very strict RFP with sustainability practices, yet you award the contract to an incumbent agriculture producer who is one of the largest pesticide users in the county when there are organic or generative farmers offering community agriculture training and access to food for the community. At this point, I have to ask the board, is it incompetence? corruption, apathy, or all of the above? I mean, what, what?

Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

Good morning, my name is Admiral, a veteran and resident of Chula Vista. I'm here with a straight message for this board, especially my supervisor, Paloma Aguirre of District 1. You're not listening to your constituents. Working families, veterans, South County residents are getting hit hard with fee increases and development decisions that favor special interests over real people. Affordable housing is slipping away, While bureaucracy grows, hello, we need leaders who actually hear the voices on the ground in Old Tide Ranch, Millennia, and Chula Vista, and not just check boxes for donors. Reject these unnecessary fee hikes that squeeze everyday San Diegans trying to buy homes or stay in our communities. Prioritize assumable VA loans, hello, more truly affordable units and infrastructure that serves taxpayers first. Transparency, accountability, and listening built this county. Get back to it. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll go to our final caller for the morning.

How are you fucktards doing today? I have to drive all the way up to Orange County to ask them questions about elections because if I were to ask any questions for the past six years to the county of San Diego that I worked for for 20 years, you would try to throw me in jail, threatening me with the cops showing up at my door, harassing me with cops, And don't say you haven't done that because when I ran for fourth board of supervisors districts, you sent cops to my door multiple times to encourage me not to run against Monica. That's on record. Why do I have to drive all the way up to Orange County and have a conversation with them where they let me know that they do nothing? There is no procedures. to pull out illegal aliens from our voter rolls. You don't cross-reference anything. He was surprised you could actually cross-reference shit. That's the craziest thing. And then you want to tell me our elections are secure? I know 100% that you guys don't cross-reference anything. You allow the illegal aliens to vote on our rolls because they benefit you because you give them benefits over the citizens. Now, the only way I could go ahead and stop that is to get you to identify them. As soon as you identify them, I don't care if they were here one year, two years, 20 years, you are taking them out of the country per law. You wanted me to find it? Fuck you. This is how I'm going to find it, and this is what you're going to do, because you work for me. I don't work for you, bitches. So if you force me to do it, you are going to kick every single one of them out of the country. I don't care if they were here for 20 years.

Thank you. Your time is up. And Vice Chair Montgomery-Sepp, that concludes requests for non-agenda public communication this morning. Again, all the remaining speakers will be heard at the conclusion of today's session.

And Madam Vice Chair, if I could just ask, Davia, could we have our ag weights and measures look into the, I guess they oversee the spraying of pesticides and fertilizers and things like that and see if there's any reports on the West Coast tomato growers.

Yes, Mr. Governor, through the Chair, we have done that and we certainly will pursue that further. Thank you.

Okay, thank you very much. Before we go to the next item, it's just a reminder, read the House rules at the beginning of this meeting. I have not issued any warnings yet, but I'd want to stress that speakers are not allowed to use loud shouting, threatening, impertinent, slanderous, profane, or abusive language to any member of the board staff or the general public. The next time I hear something, I will issue a warning. I'm trying to allow folks to get through their comments, but just want to stress that again, the same that I read at the beginning of the meeting. The next item of our agenda is the approval of the minutes of statement of proceedings for the flood control district meeting of May 19th, 2026, housing authority meeting of March 4th, 2026, and the sanitation district meeting of April 22nd, 2026. This time I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes.

So moved.

Okay, we have a motion on the floor and a second. There's no further discussion. We can go ahead and vote.

And then just for the Housing Authority meeting minutes, Commissioner Berry, do you want to register a vote for the minutes?

Yes. Sorry. Yes.

Okay, perfect. And then just noting for the record that Chair Pro Temigiri is an aye. Supervisor Anderson is an aye. Vice Chair Montgomery-Steps is an aye. And Supervisor Desmond is an aye. And with that noted, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors present voting aye.

Okay, thank you very much. Let's go on to the consent agenda. Yeah. will proceed with the formation of the consent agenda. Items one through six, housing authority item number one and sanitation district item number one. All items on the consent agenda are routine and will be acted upon with one motion. Individuals will be able to comment on the consent agenda after the supervisors pull the items they would like to pull for discussion. Any of my colleagues, would you like to pull any items Chair Pro Tem McGeary? Supervisor Anderson? Supervisor Desmond?

Yeah, I have a comment on Item 5, and I'll be registering a no vote on Item 1. I want to thank, on Item 5, thanks to the Department of Public Works for their incredible work getting our roads to an average pavement condition index of 70 throughout the unincorporated county. This is the first year we're submitting our SB1 funding list, having achieved that sweet spot of 70. So, all right. And because of the work, we can now focus on more resources and other critical areas of infrastructure like culvert repairs and replacement, new guardrails and bridge maintenance on the unincorporated areas. So this is a great work and I want to just reach out and say thank you to DPW for all your hard work and continuing to move forward with our infrastructure projects. On item number one, as I mentioned during the first reading of this item, I cannot support any more cost increases for residential housing projects. I get it. Costs keep going up. However, with inflation, high interest rates, and the material and labor cost increases, the last thing we need is government is imposing higher permit costs on housing. So I'd like to register a no vote on item one for the consent.

Thanks. Thank you so much. Let me turn it for the Housing Authority item. Tenant Commissioner Berry, would you like to pull any items or have any comments?

No, no comments.

Okay, thank you so much. Okay, and I will just go ahead and move the consent agenda and noting Supervisor Desmond's registering a no vote for item number one. Okay, the motion in a second. Let's turn to public comment.

Thank you, Vice Chair Montgomery-Shepp. We have 15 individuals who have requested to speak on items on the consent agenda, six in person, seven requesting to speak by phone. For any individuals that requested to speak on the items on consent agenda by phone, if you could please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We will begin with the in-person speakers. As your name is called, please come forward and stand on the arrows until it is your turn to speak at the podium. You'll then have two minutes to address the board. Please begin by stating your name for the record. Also, when speaking, please identify which items on the consent agenda item you're speaking about. I'd like to invite forward the first three individuals, Alicia Morrison, allegedly Audra, and Andrew Meyer.

Did you add impertinent or has that always been there? It has. I've heard it for the first time today. I was actually listening. Wow, that is interesting. And what's interesting is the government is like the only corporation that should be out of business but continues to be in business because it robs the people that funds it. And, you know, like you guys force us to get permits, but we pay you to force us to... get permits and then you have to come for full cost recovery for things that we pay for and for crappy services that you don't even really provide. It's like a child going to their parent Saying I need full-cost recovery for you raising me And stuff like that that's what's so interesting is sad because like any other business would be You know out of business yet you guys we keep you afloat for doing all this nefarious stuff and that's why with the species and you guys conserving the land like 252 million that's a lot of money uh that could have I don't even know that you guys should have spent that much on that land because I feel like again you're like everyone always screws us because we're the government no it's just that you bend over backwards and uh racketeer with your friends um but you know when we're talking about these toxic plants pesticides. I mean, Dobby is like, we've looked into it. We'll do it again. I mean, it's like you guys spray Roundup and stuff around the county. And it's like, so I mean, are we really going to be preserving the wildlife when like you just go outside and look at the homeless and what we're doing with them? I mean and then you traffic children and torture them. We heard that yesterday over again And I can just hear that in my mind Ziya just bawling wishing she could see her mother But yeah, so I just I don't know that you guys should continue down this path at any point you can course correct and Quit coming to us for more money, but I'm sure that'll never happen Next speaker is Andrew Meyer

Then as Andrew's coming forward, I'd like to invite forward Doyle Morrison and Heather, I believe it's Chaney.

Good morning. My name is Andrew Meyer. I am the director of conservation for the San Diego Bird Alliance. Nice to see you all. I haven't made a public comment in years, but I appreciate the opportunity to comment, obviously. I wanted to speak in favor of item three on the consent agenda, the multiple species conservation plan. San Diego Bird Alliance does a lot of work in order to help the county and all of the cities in the county meet and improve the multiple species conservation plan work that the county does. The multiple species conservation plan encompasses a whole bunch of birds, many with thriving wildlife around it. I specifically wanted to say thank you to the county for the county staff that have rerouted the Ramona Grasslands old survey 97 trail further away from nesting golden eagles. It was an excellent project. We talked with the county for years on it, and then the county made it happen and is currently rerouting the trail to meet the county's own guidelines on how far away our recreation should be from a nesting golden eagle pair. So thank you for that. And I also wanted to encourage the county to please roll out the native landscaping ordinance that the county staff has been working on for years, including some of our staff and many other nonprofits are on an advisory committee. The native landscaping ordinance is a great idea, comes with great input and great direction from the county and really should be on the ground, rolled out and running so that native plants are supporting native wildlife and helping the county meet its multiple species conservation plan goals in the coming years. So thank you very much.

Thank you. Next speaker, Doyle Morrison, Heather Cheney. Not seeing anyone there. We'll go to the next three. Peter Anderson, Romelia Edwards, and Ronald Asklin.

Hello again, I'm getting two or three for the price of one today. We're wanting you to increase the funding for land acquisition for the South County and North County MSCP. Remember, the Multiple Species Conservation Plan was a grand bargain between people that want to develop land and people that want to conserve land, so that each had certainty. Yet, we've been very slow in acquiring land for the North County MSCP. The South County MSCP is somewhat better, but they still need to add additional parcels of land. Right now, in the budget, there's only $2 million for land acquisition. Sierra Club would like that number increased to $8 to $10 million. In a multi-billion dollar budget, it doesn't seem like $8 to $10 million for land acquisition is a great big number. So thanks for your consideration. I hope you do your best to fully implement the multiple species conservation plans. Appreciate it.

You can come forward in any order. Thank you.

Thank you. good morning again I'm doctor on last been conservation chair the San Diego Sierra Club I'd really like to thank the staff for their South County MSCP update and stress the need to increase funding for department of parks and recreation land acquisition South County MSCP land purchases are not quite complete the North County MSCP is making progress and we need to support a future East County MSCP. In many cases, local funds are required to match federal or state dollars. Additional funding beyond the current $2 million in the FY26-27 budget to make necessary land acquisitions is needed, especially when there's an opportunity to leverage Proposition 4 monies. We request that funding in the out years be raised to $10 million per year for land acquisition. There is often a limited time window to acquire ecologically important land. If this opportunity is missed, the land may be lost forever. Thank you for considering greater funding levels for the County Department of Parks and Land Acquisition.

Thanks. Thank you. And we will now hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. Again, when it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted and you will hear a recording. Oh, we have somebody else. Okay.

I actually don't need to speak and we're in support of item number six. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. All right. So we will hear from those that are requested by phone. When it's your turn to speak, you will be unmuted. You will hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments and then we'll go ahead and begin with our first caller. First caller is Paul. Looks like you've connected. You may need to unmute.

Hi. Sorry about that, Paula Bold. Between West Coast Tomato Growers and all your other failed contracts, it may be time for an external state audit. I hope it comes before the lawsuit. Let's see. Authorize the woodside sidewalk improvement number two. This is how far behind the county is. The board letter boldly proclaims in 2022 a local roadway safety plan analyzed collision data from 2015 to 2019 and classified Woodside Avenue as one of the corridors with the highest collision rates and equity-related factors in the county. The EIR is about eight years old, too, so I'm wondering how old is the asphalt you want to use? By now, residents may have taken things into their own hands, improved their driveways, and fixed sidewalks, curbs, and gutters you plan to fix. And buffered bike lanes will lead to interference with traffic. And the board letter also says that it gives safer and more direct routes to the US Post Office, Lakeside Library, Lindo Lane County Park, Lakeside Middle School, none of which seem to be there. You are spending $15 million of our money on the project that may be a lower priority at this time. Please reject this.

Thank you. Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

Thank you. Good morning, Board. My name is Kathleen Lippitt. I'd like to address several items on the consent calendar. The first one is item one. Until the county recognizes that Housing First is not the solution to homelessness and refuses active drug users from being prioritized into housing, the problem of homelessness will continue. On consent item two, authorizing advertising awarding of, I'm sorry, not two, the mitigated next CEQA and state and county CEQA guidelines. This is about constructing sidewalks and bicycle lanes. Bicycle lanes should not be prioritized over sidewalks that allow everyone to walk safely. The multiple species conservation program, that one, protecting the diversity of species is undermined when the county simultaneously grants large-scale solar projects that scrape off the carbon sequestering soil and saturate it with chemicals that kill everything from endemic plants to insects. If the county was serious about protecting public lands from dangerous chemicals and herbicides, it would make the sale of glyphosate or Roundup or atrazine illegal, not prohibited in the county. It would make public warnings that dichlorophenic is a lethal product to the species of birds that are our sanitation crews that protect the public from the contaminants that would otherwise come from dead, dying, and rotting animal corpses. Also, item seven, traffic advisory committee recommendations. Until the county...

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

I want to know who's going to protect San Diego from the city leaders. You guys destroy everything. You waste money on public, on your land that you buy for these buildings to try and find homes for homeless, which does absolutely nothing but waste more money. I don't know what kind of profits you're making off of it, but you're destroying San Diego. And you all should be held accountable and be audited. and stop awarding yourselves for things that you do that don't do anything. You destroyed San Diego.

Sir, very quickly, can you just let us know what consent agenda items you're speaking on, please? Then you can proceed. I stopped your time.

Um... I'm not exactly sure. I was just speaking for my wife for one time.

We can't yield time. And yeah, so if your wife registered, she can't yield her time to you. So you would need to register on your own. Because that was going to be my next question is you need to also put your name for the record. So it doesn't sound like you're registered to speak. But if you would like to register to speak, you can register online. You can also call the clerk's office and we can help you register.

All right. Well, I'll just yield my time and I will wait for my wife to speak on her next topic.

Okay. If your wife has comments.

She's in the hospital and she's busy with her doctors right now. Understood. Thank you.

Okay.

We'll go to our next caller.

Could you give me a list of words I'm not allowed to say? That's number one. Number two, you guys clearly don't work for us. You clearly don't have anything. You don't care about what we have to say. I've been trying for years to get you to understand or even listen to me over vote by mail. You refuse to do it. You're going to go ahead and throw me in jail because I can't stop bugging you about that. I'll make one better for you.

Sir, I stopped your time. Just let me know what consent agenda items you're speaking on, okay? This is not non-agenda. This is consent agenda.

All of them, because you direct our money. I've been asking questions. You refuse to answer them. Matter of fact, I have not received one phone call back from your office ever for the entire time.

Sir, this is consent agenda. Either you have... Comments on the agenda items or you don't it's it's not the time to bring your other issues It's the time to speak on the consent agenda.

So I'll continue your time now and I know that you'll be able to make the connection Absolutely cunts so the connection is this you guys are making rules because you were elected but I I don't understand. I don't have the same references to words and you do. So could you give me a list of words that offend you? Could you please give me a list of words that offend you? Because there is nowhere on there. The Brown Act says I could call you whatever the fuck I want, but you want to say that I can't. So which one is it?

Your rules or the rules that have been in there forever? I've given you several conversations and a warning. You forfeit your time. Hopefully when you call in next time, you'll be able to speak on the agenda item. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp. Not seeing any callers. I'll just recall the three people that we had for in-person to see if they're in the chamber. Alicia Morrison, Doyle Morrison, and Heather Chaney. Okay. Not seeing any movement in chamber. That concludes public comment on the items. Oh, we have somebody. Okay. Wonderful. Can you just state your name for the record?

My name is Heather Chaney.

Thank you.

You're welcome. So I am in support of your, I'm not sure of the agenda item, but it has to do with adopting the housing budget for the year.

The Housing Authority item? Yes, yes. That's on this agenda.

Yes, and I'd also like to say thank you for the job that you do, because I know you get a lot of complaints without any offers of solutions. And I know how difficult it must be, especially in this economic climate, to be able to make tough choices. So I ask that anybody that has such problems that they run for office and they try to do your job because I know it's not easy. And I had the opportunity to work with all the local governments here in the county of San Diego, including the county, regarding infrastructure projects. And I can say the county by far... by far superseded any of the other, not to say anything bad about them, but you guys did a great job as far as my experience working in infrastructure. So that's, I guess that's all I have to say. So thank you. I appreciate it.

Thank you. And with that last comment, public comment on items on the consent agenda are finished now.

Okay, thank you so much. If there's no further discussion, we do have a motion and a second, and we can go ahead and vote.

Thank you, and we'll do a voice vote for this. Chair Pro Temigiri?

Yes.

Supervisor Anderson?

Aye.

Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp?

Yes.

Supervisor Desmond? Yes. And noting for the record, you're voting no on item one.

Thank you.

And then Tenant Commissioner Berry.

Three. For the first agenda item, right? Yeah. No.

You're voting no on this?

The first one. Oh, I'm so sorry. Everything together. Yes. I apologize.

No problem. So housing authority item one, you are voting aye, yes on.

Yes.

Thank you. Yes. And with that, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors and tenant commissioners who are present and voting aye. And then again, vote no, noting for the record, Supervisor Desmond voted no for item one.

Okay, thank you so much, Ryan. And thank you, Commissioner Berry for being with us here this morning. We are going to take a three minute break to reset the dais and we will be back to discuss items number seven through nine.

Okay.

Okay, thank you for your patience. Let's move on to our discussion item number seven, Traffic Advisory Committee, and then let's go on to public comment for this item.

Thank you, Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp. We have six total requests to speak, one individual in person, and five requesting to speak by phone. I'd also like to note for the record, we did receive one e-comment on this item, which was in opposition. For any individuals that requested to speak on this item by phone, please dial into the conference line with the information provided to you. Ledger Liadra is here to speak, so we'll turn it over to you.

Two minutes to talk about this. You know, it's great. So, yeah, anybody who runs for government is corrupt, so it's like, stay out of that.

It's better to be on this side and hold you guys accountable.

Anywho, with this Traffic Advisory Committee, and as we are working so diligently to get people out of their cars, I think you guys are making a big mistake by having the people fight each other. Like, you know, doing the left and right antics to be like, my side's better than yours. Because the community really needs to come together when we're going to be in a 15-minute city. And I feel like instead of making us hate each other, you guys could work towards some kind of an amusement park type of an atmosphere. You know what I mean? This could be good for you guys. I think you would have fun doing it. You could go to other amusement parks, try out the rides, be like, we have to test this out. You know, and then I feel like the people would be willing to give you guys full cost recovery for things like that. You know, we wouldn't be as like upset when you're like continuing to rob us. I feel like, you know, we might not think about it as much if like going to work when you're like live where you work. I mean, what if you just lived in an amusement park? The kids would love it. You know, I mean, maybe they wouldn't notice as much when you take them from their parents. They might not cry as much if you just constantly, you know, show them that kind of a atmosphere. You know, and like hot air balloon rides, I think that would be fun. We could do bungee jumping, like right into the water. Maybe you could offer that because, I mean, people are killing themselves off the Coronado Bridge, I feel like. Maybe we could put parachutes there, so maybe they would have a second thought, not want to do it, and maybe just have fun. I just feel like you guys aren't offering us enough fun in this enslavement that you've put us in, and I think you could do better. You know what I'm saying? Good job.

Thank you. We will now hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. When it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You'll hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments, and we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

I believe the last callers or one of the last callers on consent suggested that we don't propose solutions. Actually, a lot of the call-in speakers do propose solutions, including for housing. So I don't know where the hell you're coming from. Anyway, the tax stuff. Back to those silly five-mile-per-hour speed limit reductions, which will just make people drive slower, one hopes, but angrier. And I doubt the police are very interested in enforcing these, and it would cost us a lot for... you know, for that tiny reduction. Probably enforcement is more dangerous than the infraction, given what I've heard about the recent enforcement. The four-way stop seems to be another victory for the signmakers, not needed by us. The intersection is already stopped controlled two ways. And the board letter does not even spell out what the other warrantee criterion is. So, you know, I mean, I don't know why we even need a traffic advisory committee if they just do all these silly things about telling us why. Um, and anyway, I have the item. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

Hey, Consuelo here. And Ryan, just for the record, I was on hold to speak for the last item. And yeah, I just want to say that. Also to address the last speaker who mentioned that the people calling in to complain has not given solutions, clearly another person not paying attention to these meetings who haven't a clue of what they're saying. And yeah, that's you know, people get a skosh, uh, irritated when, uh, things are said when that's not the case. I mean, you can only take so much and guess what? We're not getting paid. So, um, people on the diets are, um, but, uh, yeah, to piggyback off of what Audra suggested, you know, this is already an amusement park. This is, uh, clown world and we have so much going on and yet it's um it's just the same thing over and over and over again it's like clown world with uh what's that movie what's that movie can you think of that movie um Groundhog Day, that's it. It's like clown little Groundhog Day and just, gosh. But anyways, yeah, I think that's all I have to say, but I really wanted to chime in for that person who commented the fact that people are not getting solutions when they have for the past five years. But who's counting? Done. Thank you.

Thank you. And Vice Chair Montgomery-Sepp, not seeing any other callers in the call-in queue, that will conclude public comment on this item.

Okay, I'll just start the board discussion briefly by thanking staff for bringing this item forward. So I also want to thank the residents of Spring Valley and the Traffic Advisory Committee for doing their due diligence to ensure safety at the intersection of Fairway Drive and Link Drive. It's encouraging to see residents and government working together in a way that illustrates direct democracy. I look forward to seeing these safety measures being implemented. So I will go ahead and move this item. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any further comments? Oh, okay, let's go ahead and vote.

And Vice Chairman Grimaceff, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors who are present and voting aye.

Let's begin our discussion over item eight, noticed public hearing, the public hearing and confirmation of levies for mosquito vector and disease control, benefit assessment, and mosquito abatement and vector control service charge for fiscal year 26-27 and related CEQA exemption. Let's go ahead and go to public comment.

Thank you, Vice Chair Montgomery. We do have six total requests to speak, one individual in person, five requests to speak by phone. I'd also like to note, for the record, we did receive one e-comment on this item, which was in favor. Again, for any individuals that requested to speak on this item by phone, if you could please dial in the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you, we'll hand it over to, allegedly, Audra, and you'll have two minutes to address the board.

I'll catch it. Thank you, Ryan. Did you guys hear about what Google's doing in the mosquitoes? Like 64 billion of them. And they're probably Bill Gates mosquitoes. And, you know, he creates those evidently, or they say, to, you know, kill other mosquitoes and stuff like that. They also say that they can vaccinate people. So they could be like doing that kind of stuff. And it's like all the toxic stuff that we're, using to get rid of these, that's not a public safety issue, right? I mean, if it's killing something else, we shouldn't worry about that and that you're gonna get money from the people to poison us, right? We're just being honest, right? Am I wrong? I'm not. Okay. I just want to make sure. I mean, at least we can be honest about what's happening and the poisoning. Um, but does it concern you? Like when they release stuff like that, does that, is it not something that we should go, Hmm, what's going on there? I mean, it's probably kind of like the chem trails, right? Jim, if, as long as we say they're, contrails, right? These are not deadly mosquitoes that are gonna come and harm us. But again, maybe this is where we're doing the levees and stuff, right? So that you guys can combat that? Or is it kind of like a depopulation thing for the people? Do you guys get to take some special kind of vaccine that would keep you guys out of the poisoning? I'm just wondering, because it's like you don't care about like the fluoride in the water, the fact that you're spraying Roundup, the mosquitoes that are being released, things like that, you know, just them, you know, cloud seeding to create storms, which is super toxic. Do you guys protect yourselves from that?

Thank you. Your time's up. All right. So we will now hear from those that requested to speak by phone. When it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You will hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments. And we will go ahead and begin with our first caller here.

Hi. Paul LeBold. It looks like the finance people, at least the mosquito vector and disease control department are doing their job. Another 6% increase, but less than the dollar. I think it's worth it, even if a lot of diseases are made possible by man messing around with genetics and similar factors. Besides, mosquitoes are nasty critters, which, by the way, messing around with genetics kind of makes me wonder when will we develop a mosquito that actually does something good like eating the crap and all the pee and poo and stuff that man puts into the water to be recycled for people, make it a bit safer. Anyway, and I sure hope that the chemicals you use to put on these mosquitoes aren't toxic and have really bad side effects like cancer, which, you know, you seem not to care too much about. With all the people who you... to spray Roundup on plants and near schools even. And I mean, it's really not good how you treat chemicals. In fact, there should probably be an audit of that. Anyway, thanks for letting me speak.

Thank you. We'll go to our next caller.

Okay, Gonzalo here. Gosh, I'm having deja vu. This is like deja vu from the Nora days because I feel like I've already suggested this back in the Nora days to the lady. I don't know if she's in the audience or if she's listening. We've given suggestions for the county to have this problem be mitigated via natural ways to do so. You can do it by... Perhaps the county can start planning some repellent plants like lemongrass, lavender, even catnip, marigolds, awesome. But it's just so funny because I do live in an unincorporated area and to see the county come in, county workers, I'm asking what they're doing. They tell me what they're doing. Hey, what are you using to spray? I'm like, not Roundup, is it? Oh, yeah, we use Roundup. Okay, great. Yeah. So, yeah, Susan G. Coleman is happy about that. But so many solutions besides what the county continues to do. And, yeah, like I said, I'm having deja vu because I don't know what meeting it was. But I do recall that people did give you guys suggestions. and solutions that were not toxic to further thicken our community and compromise our health and our lives. So I will suggest to this new board, the same. Let's start looking into natural solutions. There's so much we can do. Just the same old, same old. but that's just how this nasty sick slave system goes, right? Okay.

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

Hey there, it's Truth. Let's see. So Fairway Drive was brought up and, you know, you know, Manny Paloma, who happens to live on Fairway Drive in La Mesa, you know, she's actually been helping to create more mosquitoes. with Mexico's sewage increasing at record rates under her reign of terror. And I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about go back to 2024. So she's actually been helping create problems that she's now allegedly going to fix. But, of course, it's not really a real solution because, you know, solutions came up earlier, right? Well, larvicide is definitely not a solution. So, for example, can the county larvicide actually eradicate genetically modified mosquitoes from Bill Gates and Google? I don't think they can, right? Or do you have a new recipe that addresses that? I don't think you do because I just looked. At the website, as always, your county, one of your many county websites that are difficult to navigate. And so I looked at the chemicals. You're using the exact same stuff, Vectomax and Natural. So there was a question. Is it toxic? The answer is yes. If you go to the safety data sheet on Natural G30, it says hazard. Oh, acute toxicity inhalation category four. And it has a pictogram of an exclamation mark. And it's a signal word warning harmful if inhaled. Avoid breathing dust. Oh, no, it's still toxic stuff. Even though the county likes to claim that it's not, it is. And then to... to put on the record against misinformation. If you look at the county budget, the capital improvement program, AKA infrastructure is the least funded of every category. So no, this board is not doing a good job. They can't get rid of mosquitoes and they can't fix any infrastructure in the county. I don't know what to say. The solution is do better. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

You know what? I want to go in and apologize. I want to apologize for bugging you. Clearly, you don't have to answer the people's question. Unfortunately, my brain pattern will not let me stop. One of two things is going to happen. A, you're going to throw me in jail and I'm going to cost the taxpayers money. Or I could just do the honorable thing and just commit suicide because you guys refuse to answer my questions. I don't want to toss the taxpayers' money because you don't want to answer questions. And I cannot stop asking you questions because I feel our elections are a very important issue. Matter of fact, the most important issue there is. Now, if each and every single one of you want to go ahead and continue to throw me in jail instead of having a conversation with me, then don't be surprised on the outcome that ends up taking place. I have no intentions of causing harm to any of you or even suing you. All I want is a conversation. And all you want is to silence me, throw me and jail into the biggest, darkest hole that there ever is. You look for any excuse to go ahead and shut me up. You let other people talk off subject without even saying a word. You look for any reason to go ahead and kick me out of the meeting. And you think you're all holy, but are you a king or queen? The same thing that you criticize Trump.

Um, Justin, um, the item is about levies for mosquito vector and disease control benefit assessment. I have to stay consistent and ask you to please speak on the agenda item. Please. Thank you.

You're not gonna solve shit. Is that what you want? Is that what you want? You just want all the people asking you questions just to go ahead and commit suicide? Is it? I mean, you're not going to answer our questions. I mean, what? You already had one person commit suicide from the same frigging thing.

Your time is up. We'll go to the next speaker.

Since he's threatening suicide, can we have somebody check on him?

Hello, my name is Jennifer Roidsden. I was born and raised here in San Diego, and I don't believe that these mosquito farms is what we are needing for our communities. Not only that, they spread diseases. You guys are intentionally trying to cause more sickness. You are intentionally misusing any funds for these ridiculous projects that you have. I want to use a couple of key words just because I want the real FBI to pick up on us. And that's bombs, bombs, terrorist, terrorism and our great President Trump. There is something seriously going on in San Diego County. You guys are running rampant. You are taking these funds. You are abusing them. You take it. You take our children, you kidnap our children, you traffic our children, and you just want more money, more money, more money, more money. I think that a very rude awakening is going to happen because I have faith in my president.

And I have faith in... We are going to stop you. I just need you to speak on the item, please. You have about 45 more seconds. Please, please, please speak on the item and how that connects to whatever comments that you have. Thank you.

These mosquitoes farms are fraud. God's warriors must rise.

Thank you. We will not see any other callers. Actually, that concludes public comment on this item.

Thank you. I will entertain a motion at this time or any discussion on this item? Move to approve. Okay. A motion and a second on the floor. We can go ahead and vote.

And that's Vice Chair Montgomery's step. That motion passes unanimously with all supervisors who are present and voting aye.

Thank you, let's go ahead and go to discussion item number nine, vehicle miles traveled, mitigation updates and related CEQA exemption. I believe we have a presentation for this, so I'll turn it over to Davia and Vince and the rest of the team.

Good morning, Vice Chair and members of the board. Today's item nine is an update on vehicle miles traveled, otherwise known as VMT. As we'll lay out today, the landscape around VMT has shifted since the board's direction in 2024, and the options we're presenting today for consideration reflect that shift. We've heard from industry that introducing a local VMT mitigation program at this time is not preferred due to the reliance on the SQL 15183 exemption. We'll introduce results of the transit opportunity area assessment and discuss how those findings can be used to inform options that will be brought to the board as part of the sustainable land use framework in early 2027.

We'll start with some brief background on how VMT came into play and how it relates to our local planning. Senate Bill 743 was passed in 2013, and its intent was to support the state's climate goals by reducing driving and lowering emissions by updating how California evaluates transportation impacts. Instead of evaluating traffic congestion, known as level of service or LOS, the law required us to look at how much people drive, measured as VMT. This requirement went into effect in July 2020. Leading up to that deadline, the county began updating local procedures, including the county's transportation study guide, to meet state requirements. However, guidance for VMT analysis has been subject to numerous changes resulting from litigation, case law, and state guidance. Of note, the county's 2011 general plan provides the foundation for CEQA 15183 streamlining, but that streamlining is based on LOS, not VMT. In June, 2024, the board provided additional direction to consider options for a VMT mitigation program, including an unincorporated area mitigation program, a regional and or partnership mitigation program, and a focused transit opportunity area or TOA mitigation program with and without land use changes. Since then, changes have occurred that have affected the barriers that originally informed the board's direction. This timeline shows how state actions and legal interpretation have changed the way VMT works in the unincorporated areas. When the state adopted SB 743 and implemented the requirements for VMT analysis in 2020, VMT was heavily cited as a barrier to housing in unincorporated areas due to it affecting the county's ability to continue to use 15183. At the time, individual projects needed to address VMT on their own, including full VMT studies and often an EIR. These were the conditions that prompted the board to direct VMT mitigation options in 2022, along with directing development of a sustainable land use framework. A key shift occurred later in 2024. Following changes in case law and legal interpretations, it was clarified that the county could continue to rely on 15183 streamlining for general plan consistent projects using its LOS-based transportation analysis. While there was initial hesitation to rely on this interpretation, confidence among the development industry has been building and applicants are now beginning to use 15183 streamlining.

While CEQA 15183 streamlining is currently a viable pathway, not all projects qualify for streamlining under the general plan. As a result, some projects still need VMT mitigation within unincorporated areas. First, we'll talk about the state program that creates a voluntary fee-based VMT mitigation option that developers can pay into. Second, we'll provide an update on the SANDAG regional VMT mitigation program. Third, we'll discuss the option to pursue a local VMT mitigation exchange program. And lastly, we will review the results of the TOA assessment, and we will discuss how the TOA findings can inform future planning efforts as part of the sustainable land use framework. First, we'll take a look at the state program. This spring, the state released draft program guidelines and mitigation cost estimates with final program guidelines expected by July 1st of this year. Using the state's draft costs and applying them to a recently approved project in North County Metro, it would have an estimated mitigation fee of $6,800 per unit, while a recent project in the Bonzel community would have an estimated cost per unit of $231,000. This shows the cost to mitigate VMT within unincorporated areas can be extremely high. Fees paid into the state program would support gap funding needed to build affordable housing in areas that the state defines as location efficient. Participation in the state program would be optional and local agencies would retain the authority to establish thresholds and determine when and how much mitigation is required. The county has been working with SANDAG to develop a regional mitigation program as part of a larger technical advisory committee. The program recommendations include implementation of a regional credit or banking program, a regional exchange option, and guidelines to support development of locally administered in lieu fee programs, including a fee nexus study. These tools can provide additional mitigation options and can be complementary to a local program if directed. The regional program was presented to SANDAG committees in April of 2026. The county does not need to commit to long-term participation today, but today's item includes a staff recommendation to continue to partner with SANDAG and to pursue additional grant funding for a three-year pilot program. An option that the board may consider directing today is to develop a local exchange program. Developers could choose from a list of VMT reducing projects to either fund or construct as a means of VMT mitigation. The county could set up this program within one year and within existing budget allocations. Due to the availability of the 15183 streamlining pathway, the program would likely have minimal use and the cost to developers would likely be high. However, it could benefit some applicants who need modest VMT reductions and want a clear, predictable option. The board directed a TOA assessment evaluated areas where increasing housing densities could potentially result in reductions in VMT. The TOA assessment included a land use analysis informed by market and financial feasibility to identify areas where increases in density could be supported. In some locations, it was found that modest increases in density could lower VMT and create more VMT efficient areas. While no land use changes are proposed at this time, these findings show that targeted land use changes can influence VMT performance in meaningful ways. In summary, all of these strategies can complement each other and ultimately work together. However, each program differs in terms of who controls and who benefits. A bigger picture question is how these programs measure up when it comes to supporting housing. None of these three programs would provide any CEQA streamlining. For now, we have a CEQA 15183 streamlining pathway using the 2011 general plan analysis. However, this may require a change in the future. A long-term solution to align local plans and policies with VMT requirements is being considered as part of the sustainable land use framework. A key aspect of this strategy is advancing a local VMT mitigation program and potential land use changes with an EIR as part of a focused general plan update. We anticipate future land use changes will be necessary to support future planning efforts, such as identifying new RHNA sites as part of the next housing element cycle. Cost is cited as the biggest concern when it comes to VMT mitigation. Based on draft costs from the state program, we know that mitigation within unincorporated areas will likely be very expensive depending on the location. By considering a VMT mitigation program with an EIR, there is an opportunity for the board to weigh in on where housing should be prioritized and ensure VMT mitigation fees in those locations are set in a way that reflects those priorities. Staff will be returning in early 2027 with an update on the sustainable land use framework where we will continue conversations on advancing long-term solutions for VMT mitigation, including shifting our existing 15183 streamlining approach to align with state requirements for VMT analysis. In summary, today we are asking for direction to continue working with SANDAG on a regional VMT mitigation program. The board can consider the TOA land use changes as part of the options for the framework when staff returns for direction. We have also outlined an option to direct staff to develop a local VMT exchange program. While this program would be expected to have limited utility and mitigation would likely be expensive, it would offer a local tool for VMT mitigation. And lastly, we reviewed the state VMT mitigation program that is in development and discussed our plans to return to this board next year with options for a sustainable land use framework, including approaches to integrate VMT into our local policy framework. This concludes our presentation and staff are available for questions.

Okay, thank you so much. If it's okay with the board, we'll go to public comment, then we'll come back for board discussion.

Thank you, Vice Chairman Grimmer. Except we have nine total requests to speak, three people in person and six requesting to speak by phone. I'd also like to note for the record, we did receive one e-call mount on this item. A position wasn't registered for it. Any individuals that requested to speak on this item by phone, please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We'll go ahead and begin with the in-person speakers. As your name is called, if you could please come forward and stand on the arrows until it's your turn to speak at the podium. You'll have two minutes to address the board. And if you could please begin by stating your name for the record. I'd like to invite forward allegedly Audra, Peter Anderson, and Ronald Asklin.

You guys are really good at fraud and what you tell people. It's kind of like COVID when it was the flu. I mean, really an invisible killer dot. And then it's like, what do we need to do? Tell people that so they go get the vaccine. So here it's like the climate is killing us. All the driving is killing us, right? When it's geoengineering, we don't want to look at that because that would ruin the scam, you know what I'm saying? And so that is to get us out of our cars. As you said, it's not about congestion, it's about how much we drive. Right? What a shame. I mean, imagine kids. They're never going to know what it's like to drive a car. That sucks. Man, kids used to be like, I can't wait to be 16 and go drive. And now it's like, sorry, you can't. We've got to save the planet. You're going to have to walk and bike. And they're like, what? Kids don't even want to do that. They're like, I'm not doing that. I want to ride. It's like, well, you can go ride the bus for free where you could get kidnapped or something. And so it's just interesting the way you guys do like exchanging of credits with that. I feel like it's like air. At some point, we're going to be charged to just breathe. And so, you know, we'll be able to exchange credits, maybe like a fart for a sneeze, I don't know. But I'm wondering, like, if you guys want me to stay home and save vehicle miles traveled, you could pay me to do it. Because you guys are talking about, you know, changing behaviors and stuff. So I feel like if you want to get us out of our cars, give us some of our money back, shit. You're not fixing the roads. So it's like, I mean, you want to really incentivize people, put some money back in our pocket. You're like, no, that's not what we're here for. We're here to find any scam we can to make you guys so afraid that you'll do whatever we say. It's so sad. People are so stupid and they fall for anything and that's unfortunate. But good for you guys.

Again, Dr. Peter Anderson, Sierra Club San Diego, resident of Hamul. I'm extremely disappointed with the county's approach toward VMT. On September 11, 2014, on a 3-2 vote, the county board of supervisors adopted the climate action plan and the smart growth alternative. I was present in this very chamber when that happened. That you adopted the smart growth alternative entitled the fire safe and low VMT alternative. That should be the primary guideline which guides staff. Instead, we have staff running off in another direction and we have the attorneys for the county telling us that what happened on September 11th, 2024 never happened. What we'd like to see is a real VMT program that contributes to a reduction in greenhouse gas here in the county. I think 15183 is a circumvention of both the intent of climate action plan and the intent of state law. And our attorneys say that it certainly does not follow the spirit of VMT reduction and may not follow the letter. And so litigation may have to occur if this happens. Sierra Club wants housing. But we want housing in intelligent areas, not in sprawl throughout the county. Needs to be built near transit. Needs to be built where there's already infrastructure. Not in far-flung areas of the county with an exemption from 15183 based on a 2011 general plan where climate change was not even a discussion at that time. Next year we'll see an El Nino hit San Diego and we'll see how bad climate change really is on us.

Good morning supervisors once again, I'm doctor ronald asklin conservation chair of the San Diego Sierra Club. We're in the middle of a climate crisis greenhouse gas emissions. Are causing an unprecedented rise in global temperatures leading to climate destabilization in San Diego County cars and light duty trucks are responsible for 41% of greenhouse gas emissions. To address these emissions, we need to build new housing near jobs and near mass transit. Reducing VMT will have a significant impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in San Diego County. As Peter mentioned, I was right here on September 11th, 2024, When we passed the climate action plan, that same motion approved the fire safe and VMT efficient alternative. We need to implement the VMT efficient alternative that this board actually passed. So thank you for taking VMT into account and doing it the right way. On another note, we really appreciate your service. We don't always agree with the supervisors, but you're doing a public service and thank you.

Thank you. We will now hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. When it is your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You will hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments and we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

Two types of reports that are produced, level of service reports and vehicle miles traveled reports, LOS and VMT. No two report on just VMT. There are two different concepts. LOS and VMT are two different concepts. One measures congestion delay. The other measures the distance traveled. The two concepts cannot be combined. As long as people drive, there will be congestion and delay caused by other factors than just miles traveled. Mainly factors the driver has no control over like the number of other drivers on the road, accidents, width of the roads, and so on. VMT as a measure of pure distance has nothing to do with congestion or delay. Let me be clear. If a car is delayed, caught in traffic or something, that means the car will pump out more carbon dioxide for less miles traveled, which is essentially the opposite of what VMT wants to do. reduce the distance traveled and therefore the carbon dioxide regardless of delays. And VMT might also be made less useful or even not useful if alternative fuel sources like steam, hydrogen, solar, or even some kind of other power are developed to replace those fire trap EVs. So no to a report on GMT. It's just a waste of time and money. But I have a solution. Let's ban cars totally go back.

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next caller. Next caller is Consuelo. Your phone might be muted.

Okay, Consuelo here. Okay, yeah, I'm just kind of taken aback just how unbelievable, unconscious this meeting has gone after somebody just announced that they wanted or they were considering committing suicide if they're not going to be heard or spoken to. Only Jim mentioned something, and then the meeting just goes on, and nobody even mentions anything. That's how disgusting of a world we live in. Nobody cares. You're talking about carbon. Yes, truly, we are the carbon they're trying to reduce. One less person on the planet is most likely how the majority are, like, yay, rooting for. You know, it's just so sick. Yeah, so sad. This is the system that people are trying to keep alive. People even care that the votes matter. I mean, honestly, at this point, it's just... Unbelievable. Unbelievable. Okay.

So back to the time. Just please speak on that item. I know, girl.

Retarded, stupid item.

Thank you.

Disguised as carbon content from fossil fuels when we really, like I said, truly are the carbon they're trying to reduce. And yeah, you guys keep pushing these things. The guy from the Sierra Club, Disappointed? No wonder. I'm not surprised. It's just another organization in lockstep with the World Economic Forum and the UN agenda for the 21st century. This is how it's going. Incrementally, you guys work by having our movement be minimized and all for the planet, right? No, it's all for control. Wake up. Honestly, it is. It's like I don't... I don't see how people don't see that by now, but I guess, you know, when you've been inoculated so many times, you just start to just be, you know, step for dives and just go with the flow and continue to, you know, continue on the hamster wheel to, to the, to know where it's built, you know? But anyways, yeah, I'm just.

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next caller.

Good morning, Board of Supervisors. My name is Evan Strawn. I'm speaking on behalf of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce. I want to start by thanking staff for their hard work on this item before you today. One of the greatest challenges facing our member businesses is a lack of available and affordable housing so that they can attract and retain employees. Unfortunately, housing production in the unincorporated area has not kept pace with demand, and BMT regulations are a major factor in that. Currently under the 15183 exemption, this has allowed general plan consistent projects to move forward. And so in light of this, the county should focus on removing barriers to housing in VMT efficient areas or TOAs, especially via work on the upcoming sustainable land use framework that staff mentioned. A local VMT mitigation program could be useful for some projects, but given the incredibly high mitigation costs associated, would be narrowly and seldom used. Future land use planning in BMP-efficient areas will instead be key for helping the county encourage new housing. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We'll go to our next caller.

It's true. The sustainable land use framework, vehicle miles travel, GHG reduction, and transit opportunity areas are all nice phrases for the United Nations Agenda 21 plan to push people out of rural and then suburban areas. The only real mitigation goal is to financially lock out families from moving to where they can afford a nice single-family home. Thanks to AB 130 and a million other bad bills, now the average family can't even afford a small home for the California million-dollar price tag. The county started with villages and then abandoned the promise in 2020 with the progressive rate of terror. They went from level of service, something tangible and beneficial, to VMT, something totalitarian and harmful. Add on to that all of the evil housing bills introduced by pervert Scott Weiner, including SB 79 and its derivatives, and now the state is facing imminent affordable housing destruction to the benefit of the corporate developers who will now get buy-right approval on the most desired land. Their increased density leads to increased congestion, increased housing prices, and increased gentrification. The Sacramento Swamp and this corrupt county board don't care about those negative effects. They only want to alter the VMT requirements so their corporate developer campaign funders can build, alter, and profit off densifying the unincorporated areas, too. That's the only benefit you guys, your general plan, whatever, bring. And a San Diego regional VMT mitigation program will specifically be used to benefit areas like coastal North County, Perez area, where developers are salivating in favor of further using the areas of Willing Pond, the city of San Diego, as stack-to-pack dumping grounds akin to more San Marcos North cities. The more you build, the higher the cost of housing. San Diego County has actually lost 16,000 plus residents. It'd be wiser to prepare for a growth than MP Potemkin's stack, in fact, than in a need for them or for VMT. Nothing proposed is a real solution because the climate cold and the housing crisis are scams. California has a self-induced affordability and educational crisis, so Sierra Club can shove their lawsuit threats. We do not fear.

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker. Next speaker is Jennifer. Your phone might be muted. You there, Jennifer? Okay, we'll go to our next speaker.

Let's be clear. I didn't say I was going to kill myself today. I have until September. That's when you're gonna throw me in jail. Now, regarding this issue, the mild tax and all that stuff, let's just go ahead and go to the core problem. Core problem is Proposition 13, property tax. You get 5% out of 1%. You go ahead and make all these deals with all these housing projects that does the bare minimum to help homeless and our housing problem to get the maximum funding. You could go ahead and find other ways to get money by recycling plastic. The gasoline that is created from plastic is much cleaner than the gasoline that is coming from the ground. It can go ahead and solve most of your problems. Matter of fact, San Diego could go ahead and generate $150 million by just recycling the plastic in our landfill that comes in every single day. It could generate gasoline that we could use that is much cleaner than the gasoline that comes out of the ground. We could go ahead and take the byproduct of that low-grade carbon and turn it into graphene and replace the lithium and cobalt batteries with that. But here's the thing. Your politicians don't listen to you. They don't give a rat's ass about what you have to say. And no matter how many times you call them, they don't have to listen to you. So the better thing is, A, forget about it. And if you can't, might as well just kill yourself. Right? Because I want answers. You don't want to provide them for me because you want to commit crimes. That's the only reason why you refuse to address these issues. Because as long as you can play stupid, you can allow this to continue to happen. As long as you can play ignorant, you can pretend you didn't have the information.

Your time is up, and we will go back to Jennifer to see if... Jennifer is available. If not, that will conclude public comment.

Hello, Jennifer Royston. I don't know much about the situation, but what I do know is that all the funding is being sold by very greedy people. And if people don't stand up and say, okay, well, this is for our streets, make our streets better. This is for our children. Let's make that better. The only way for evil to prosper is for good men to stand silent. God's warriors must rise and we stop taking from the taxpayers to fill your greedy pockets. I'm done. Thank you. Help me.

Thank you. And Vice Chair Montgomery's step, not seeing any other callers. That concludes public comment on this item.

Thank you so much. I'll go over to Supervisor Desmond.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Appreciate it. And I want to say thank you to Planning and Development Services for all your work you put into this. A lot has changed with VMT here in Desmond. particularly since 2022, and especially around the legal interpretations of CEQA and the Exemption 15183. So projects that are consistent with our general plan can now avoid the VMT analysis altogether. which means they have no VMT impacts that require mitigation. So given that, personally, I don't think it's necessary for us to continue dedicating staff time to develop a local VMT mitigation at this time, since we've got this 15183 exemption. However, I do support continued participation, working with SANDAG on a regional VMT mitigation program and having a seat at the table and ensuring that we can advocate for the communities in the unincorporated areas so um i got a question but i'm personally with the recommendations one two and three i'm fine with and you got a b and c under under three And I was considering on item four, you're asking for direction on whether to pursue a local VMT mitigation exchange program at this time. If we were to delay that 12 months, is that going to hurt, set us back? Is that going to, we'll have more information in 12 months? I'm just kind of curious what your position is on waiting on recommendation number four and coming back like within 12 months with recommendations to move forward.

Through the vice chair supervisor, if the board wishes to move forward with the local mitigation program at a later date, that would be absolutely fine. We expect it to be a fairly short runway to get it up and running should we receive direction. We'll also have a number of touch points in the next 12 months where there could be direction or conversation about it again. we'll have the sustainable land use framework coming forward in early 2027. And if there's conversations between now and then with stakeholders or other members that would like to direct the local mitigation program at that point or any other changes to VMT, we could certainly discuss it during the sustainable land use framework hearing as well.

Well, I guess, I don't know if you were going to jump in on that, but I guess what I'm considering is if we start one now, a local VMT program, things could change in the next 12 months or so, and you'd have to start over again, or you'd have to, I don't know, I'm just trying to figure out the best way to, when would we start the local? The regional one will be in work, but the local one, I'm just trying to figure out the best timing for that.

Thank you for the follow-up. That helps. In terms of the timing in the next 12 months, if there was no direction today to create a local mitigation program, the benefit there would be we could see how the SANDAG regional program is continuing to grow, and we could see where the state program is going over the next year to see how a local program could supplement those versus being developed now before those are both in place.

And plus, you could always come back within six months and say, hey, we got to start this.

Yes.

Okay. All right. So, um, and a chair, vice chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve, uh, items, uh, one, two, three, a three B and three C, but then ask for recommendation number four, direct the staff not to continue at this time for the local VMT mitigation, but return within 12 months with an update on CEQA one five, one eight three, and provide analysis on best practices and other, and what other jurisdictions, the state and the, and the SANDAG are putting through in terms of VMT mitigation. So that would be my motion. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. So I have a procedural question. I know that you all are coming back. We're going to discuss inclusionary housing. We're going to discuss updates to our code, just cleaning that up as far as land use is concerned. When is the deadline on coming back to us on those things?

Vice Chair, we intend to bring the inclusionary housing ordinance to the next land use hearing at the end of June. Then in November, we are expecting to bring a project called Housing Unlocked where we are making changes to zoning to allow people to build out to the general plan density. That's a lot of the removing barriers and making zoning changes to allow people to develop that land to the existing density. And then also in the fall, we have a zoning ordinance cleanup that we'll be bringing where we talk to different stakeholders about zoning changes that would make sense for a cleanup. Then following all of those zoning ordinance changes in 2027, early 2027, we're bringing the sustainable land use framework, which will then be a larger policy conversation and discussion where the board and stakeholders can weigh in on land use changes that they would like to see in our planning documents. At that point, we would also have updates on the smart growth alternative and changes that we could make in land use capacities in that regard.

Okay. So, Supervisor, if we could add the local mitigation program, VMT, program to that discussion at the beginning of 2027. You won't be here, but you'll be in tough, but I think it, it, it, it aligns with, you know, all of these issues that we have to discuss around how we're doing in regulating land use development as a County. So if that is a little bit of an amendment.

So that would be to bring it back in, January of early, early 2027.

Six to nine months.

Yeah.

As opposed to 12.

Well, I actually, they could return sooner in, in my motion. I could say in return to the board within 12 months.

Yeah. Or just whenever we do that particular item where we're talking about zoning ordinance updates, sustainable land, the framework, All of those things we're, we're due to discuss at the beginning of 2027. So it really doesn't matter. I just want to, I want that conversation to be included in the overall and comprehensive discussion on land use policy. So that's however we word that or interpret that.

So if I just put it within 12 months or, or sooner, how's that? Okay.

Sooner. Yep. That's, that's perfect. Okay. Thank you. So just thank you for all of your work over the years in efforts to try and establish a strong mitigation program that balances transportation, equitable land use planning, and environmental impacts. I think all of our discussions show how tough it is, you know, to try to get it right as we balance just this dire need for housing along with the environmental impacts that building does have to our communities. And so I do agree that recommendations 1 through 3C are appropriate at this time. I especially believe that the Sandag Regional VMT Exchange Program could be beneficial for us to be at the table there. I hear my colleagues, and particularly I'm looking over at Supervisor Anderson, discussing, you know, how challenging it is because public transportation doesn't have the coverage in so many parts of your district. So I think the SANDAG discussion, big picture, will really be helpful in that. And it's an opportunity for us to partner with them, allow our staff to have quality control and develop best practices with that sustainable land use framework and visioning that we're going to be doing from here through 2027. I will go ahead and second the motion that's on the floor and I'll turn it over to Supervisor Anderson.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm confused. Are we moving forward with local mitigation or that's not part of the proposal?

No, it's holding off on that until a point in time when you get other information back early next year.

Okay, so that we're not spending any more money pursuing that until, great, that's all, that's a clarification. And for the record, I'm not, while we don't have mass transit currently, doesn't mean that we wouldn't have it in the future. And when the initial tax was passed, there was a trolley to Ramona that was quickly removed. So it's not out of the possibility of the future. So I'm not against it. I'm just saying, thank you.

And I don't think you give any impression for me that you're against it, just that it's not there, right? And so, Chair Pro Temagiri.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I also support the item. I think that we should continue to work with Sandex. Something I didn't get the opportunity to ask you guys during the briefing was, do you guys have staff to staff ongoing meetings on that particular topic? Well, given that I'm the representative of this body on Sand Egg, the primary, I would just like to get updates on that as we move towards a vote at Sand Egg so we can be on the same page. And then I also support using transit opportunity area analysis to inform the sustainable land use framework. I think that we need to look more comprehensively at the housing production, land use, transit access, climate goals, and community priorities. Yeah, I just, I think this is a good, reasonable approach. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much, everyone. If there is no further board discussion, we do have a motion and a second on the floor. We can go ahead and vote.

And Vice Chairman Montgomery-Seth, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors who are present. And voting aye.

Okay, let's go to our last item of the day, and that is the flood control district item one, adopt an ordinance to delegate signatory authorities for encroachment agreements and related CEQA exemption. Thank you again, team. Let's go to public comment.

Thank you, Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp. We have eight total requests, four individuals in person, four requesting to speak by phone. I'd also like to note for the record, we did receive one e-comment on this item, which was in opposition. Again, for any individual that requested to speak on this item by phone, please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We'll go ahead and begin with the in-person speakers. As your name is called, please come forward and stand on the arrows and tell it is your turn to speak at the podium. You'll then have two minutes to address the board. Please begin by stating your name for the audio record. I'd like to invite forward Alicia Morrison, allegedly Audra, Doyle Morrison, and Luis Sanz.

Yes, I would like to make a recommendation, which I assume you're going to take because you take all of my recommendations, Monica. I would like to be one of the delegated signatories for these encroachment agreements. I, in fact, would like to expand on the encroachment agreements to bring you guys into the mix of your encroaching upon the people because that's what you continue to do. And so I feel like, you know, to get full, you know, like our money's worth and to make the people think that you care, because we know that you don't and that's obvious. But I mean, when you're encroaching on the people's lives, you really want them to believe that you do so that they believe when you say that we're here for your safety. They do whatever you say. They'll actually walk off that cliff if you just tell them. Who knows what? You could tell them a lot of different things. But I feel like as you're encroaching on the people and putting us into these zones, 15-minute city type of things, the people are going to rise up at some point. because they're getting kind of pissed off that you guys are engaged in such fraud, waste, and abuse, and encroaching on it, bringing in surveillance, things like that, you know, using our data against us, like basically weaponizing life. So, I mean, if you guys don't want the people to get so mad that they come in and, like, throw you guys out, I do know that this is a bulletproof thing here, so good for you guys. But, like, I mean, you might want to, again, bring in some kind of amusement park type of fun. That way we're not going to really notice what you guys are doing. But you continue down this path, I mean, the people are going to have you out before you know it. I mean, it's still going to take forever, but it's on the way.

Thank you, and then final call, Alicia Morrison, Doyle Morrison, or Luis Sainz? Not seeing any movement in the chamber. We'll go ahead and go to our callers. Again, for those that have requested to speak by phone, when it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You will hear a recording to begin your comments, and then we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

All the both here. Hey, did I hear amusement like bread and circuses? That's really an old concept. I mean, why do we need the Board of Supervisors to bring that back? Can't we do it ourselves? I mean, it looks like the Board of Supervisors is doing pretty well at... providing bread and circuses. I mean, all their free food they give out and all the laugh riots, their silly, stupid comments produced. Anyway, the ordinance in question has a bunch of terms which might be used to ensure property's proper use. But, you know, an ordinance should be a really official legal document, and it should be specific about what terms will ensure a property's proper use. Otherwise, I foresee legal problems such as expensive lawsuits and litigation and time wasted, that sort of thing that goes on and on. So I think, you know, the ordinance needs to be specific. The ordinance needs to be redone in a proper manner. So, you know, no other ordinance exists in its present form. Thanks.

Thank you. We'll go to our next caller. Next caller is Jennifer. Your phone might be muted again. You there, Jennifer? Okay, not seeing any responsiveness from Jennifer. We'll go to our next caller.

Thank you for reminding me about this. I worked with the county for 20 years. I worked in a department that had a year off, and people got late. They took a lot of time off, and it was hard to get back to work. We used to go ahead and manage all these different areas, but what ended up happening in 2020 is, because of the pandemic, All the county employees stopped doing their job. They stopped monitoring the area, telling people to cut their lawns, make sure that there wasn't any fire. On top of that, we... We stopped clearing out the waterways. We stopped monitoring all the area and the pollution going into it. We stopped doing what we needed to do. And it took a very long time because there's no pressure for the county employees to go in and do it. The Board of Supervisors are benefiting off of their negligence. Flat out, no question, people's houses got flooded out by the county's negligence. There is no question. You can look at the records. Records before and then records after. When did they go ahead and put these notices out? When did they go ahead and clean out these storm drains? You could see a clear pattern. What they're trying to do is make up this whole climate issue and then to go ahead and push their own goals. All this shit is documented. How do I know? I've seen many of it. I can't talk to San Diego because they refuse to answer the public's questions. I have to drive up to Orange County and talk to that county in order for me to get answers. That's probably why Don Wagner is suing Webby over our voter rolls. But clearly, all five of our board members Like the fact that a lot of fraud.

Your time is up. We'll go to our next caller.

Okay. Hey, Comptola here. Just wanted to chime in to say, just to remind the people of the county that our legislators are doing whatever they want in spite of what some of the concerned citizens are warning them about, you know, have been suggesting, have been warning. And, yeah, that's where we're at in the matrix. So, yeah, great meeting. Great meeting. I'm glad to hear that you're going to stay alive for us, Gambler. We need you, buddy. We need you, brother. All right. That's all I got to say.

Thank you. We will go back to Jennifer to see if she has comments and is connected and Okay, Jennifer, I've unmuted you again. Are you there? Okay, not seeing any responsiveness from Jennifer. That's gonna conclude public comment on this item, Vice Chair Montgomery-Stepp.

Thank you so much. If there's no further discussion, I will entertain a motion for this agenda item at this time. Okay, I have a motion by Chair Pro Tem, Aguirre. I will go ahead and second that. Um, we can go ahead and vote.

And vice chairman, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors who are present and voting aye.

Thank you, Ryan. We will now resume with non-agenda public comment. Do we have any remaining individuals who wish to speak?

Yes, Vice Chair Montgomery stepped. We still have five outstanding requests all coming via phone. So we'll give those constituents a moment to call in. When they call in, when it is your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You will hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments. And just give folks a moment to call in. Okay, let's go to see if Jennifer is available. Other than that, I don't have anyone else called in. Okay, Jennifer, I unmuted your call again. You might be muted. You there, Jennifer? Okay. Not seeing any responsiveness from that caller. Not seeing any other callers in the queue. That is going to conclude non-agenda public communication for today.

Okay. Thank you so much. I was trying to give her a little bit more time. I know her comments would have been appropriate for non-agenda. But since we've concluded with non-agenda public comment, we have no further business for this meeting. So thank you, everyone. Meeting is adjourned.

The next regular meeting of the board will take place on June 24th at 9 a.m.