The county of San Diego is bracing itself for the next chapter in a years-long legal saga over its plans to limit greenhouse gases.

The board of supervisors unanimously approved on Wednesday its latest iteration of a so-called Climate Action Plan — once again drawing the ire of environmental groups and concerned residents who say elected officials aren’t taking the issue seriously.

“After years of litigation and having some of the best scientists and one of the wealthiest communities in the world, this is what you come up with?” said Jack Shu with the conservation group Cleveland National Forest Foundation. “Essentially, you have no plan.”

In response to criticism, supervisor Bill Horn said he was primarily concerned with whether the plan would hold up in court.


“Make no mistake. The minute we vote on this, they’re going to file another lawsuit,” he said, adding: “I’m interested in resolving this issue with the court. That’s the biggest issue to me.”

County lawyers said repeatedly at Wednesday’s meeting that the plan should satisfy California law.

The county was ordered by the courts to redraft its climate blueprint about three years ago after the Sierra Club challenged the document in court. The group argued successfully that the document lacked sufficient details on how the county would realize deep cuts in climate emissions.

The San Diego Chapter of the Sierra Club said it’s still considering whether to file suit against the county challenging the newly approved climate plan.


The county’s most recent plan to fight global warming leans heavily on creating a new program that would allow developers to offset emission through purchasing carbon credits around the globe. Registries that sell such offsets have been around for more than a decade in California, offering projects that range from paying farmers not to cut down forests to investing in solar cook stoves in developing nations.

Critics of the carbon credit strategy say the system is easy to game and the benefits hard to confirm — especially when the funded programs aren’t local.

“I’m really disappointed that you’ve wasted all our taxpayer money when you’re not really going to address the issue,” said Fallbrook resident Joy Frew.

Supervisors said the offset program will allow the county to fight climate change while also investing in much-needed housing.


“There’s no doubt we do have a difficult task before us,” said Supervisor Dianne Jacob. “It’s a balancing act between trying to provide affordable housing in this region and also (not) adding cost to that affordable housing.”

Chairwoman Kristin Gaspar echoed those concerns: “It’s important to remember that all CAP measures come with a cost, and at the end of the day, all of these costs are realized either directly or indirectly by our residents.”

The county’s climate plan calls for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions 2 percent below 2014 levels by 2020, 40 percent by 2030 and 77 percent by 2050.

Beyond cutting greenhouse gases through carbon credits, the document calls for boosting the use of renewable energy to account for 90 percent of all electricity consumed in the county by 2030.


The green energy program — which would account for 30 percent of all reductions under the plan — sets up a controversial decision for the supervisors. Much like in the city of San Diego, elected officials in the county will need to decide whether to start a government-run alternative to San Diego Gas & Electric or rely on a program designed by the investor-owned utility.

Members of the Clear the Air Coalition, which includes lobbyists paid by the shareholders of SDG&E’s parent company Sempra Energy with some of the region’s most powerful groups — from the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce to the Downtown San Diego Partnership to the San Diego County Taxpayers Association — urged caution in the decision of whether to abandoning the utility.

“I think it’s very important that we do not sign up for a risk that we don’t know how to quantify,” said Haney Hong, president and CEO of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association.

Advocates also expressed concerns the plan doesn’t do enough to limit tailpipe emissions. While transportation accounts for roughly 45 percent of greenhouse gases in the county, efforts to reduce vehicle miles traveled, or VMT, represent only a small part of the plan.


Elected officials recognized the situation, arguing that in unincorporated rural areas alternatives to driving are limited.

Supervisor Ron Roberts said that in the future electric vehicles will likely obviate the need to limit driving under climate plans.

“Will vehicle miles traveled go up or down?” he said. “I would argue that I’m not sure that that’s an important issue, as long as the greenhouse gases are going down.”

Staff officials said the county is already on track to meet its goals for 2020, largely thanks to state regulations such as fuel efficiency standards. About half of emissions reductions in the plan are expected to come from state actions and programs through 2030.


Twitter: @jemersmith


Phone: (619) 293-2234

Email: joshua.smith@sduniontribune.com