Board of Directors Meeting MinutesMeeting MinutesFriday, February 27, 2026 at 9:00 A.m. - 12:30 P.m.SANDAG Boardroom 1011 Union Street, First FloorSan Diego, CA 92101Voting Members Present:Chair Lesa Heebner (Solana Beach)First Vice Chair Joe LaCava (City of San Diego - Seat A)Second Vice Chair John Minto (Santee)Councilmember Kevin Shin (Carlsbad)Deputy Mayor Cesar Fernandez (Chula Vista)Mayor John Duncan (Coronado)Councilmember Terry Gaasterland (Del Mar)Mayor Bill Wells (El Cajon)Mayor Bruce Ehlers (Encinitas)Mayor Dane White (Escondido)Mayor Pro Tem Jack Fisher (Imperial Beach)Vice Mayor Lauren Cazares (La Mesa)Mayor Alysson Snow (Lemon Grove)Vice Mayor Luz Molina (National City)Mayor Esther Sanchez (Oceanside)Councilmember Christopher Pikus (Poway)Councilmember Vivian Moreno (City of San Diego - Seat B)Mayor Rebecca Jones (San Marcos)Councilmember Corinna Contreras (Vista)Supervisor Joel Anderson (County of San Diego)Others Present:Robin Joy Maxson (Association of Planning Groups)Ann Fox (Caltrans District 11)Councilmember Matthew Leyba-Gonzalez (Metropolitan Transit System)Councilmember Jewel Edson (North County Transit District)Anna Shepherd (U.S. Department of Defense)Meeting Video1.Call to Order Public Comments: Chair Heebner called the meeting to order at 9 a.m. 2.Non-Agenda Public Comments/Member Comments Public Comments: Chief Executive Officer Mario Orso presented an update on agency activities. Public Comment: Shirli Weiss, Purita Javier, Cesar Javier, Leif Gensert, Andrea Ebbing, Blair Beekman, Truth, The Original Dra, Marco Espinosa, Paul the Bold, Consuelo. Member Comments: Chair Heebner, Mayor Jones, Councilmember Shin. 3.Consent Public Comments: Public Comments: Camilla Rang, Amy Cheshire, Shirli Weiss, Cesar Javier, Purita Javier, Dustin Fuller, Blair Beekman, Truth, The Original Dra, Consuelo, Andrea Ebbing, Leif Gensert. Motioned by:Mayor SanchezSeconded by:Councilmember Shinto approve Consent Agenda Item Nos. 3.1 - 3.10.For (17)Mayor Duncan, Supervisor Anderson, Councilmember Gaasterland, Mayor Wells, Mayor White, Mayor Pro Tem Fisher, Vice Mayor Molina, Mayor Jones, Second Vice Chair Minto, Chair Heebner, First Vice Chair LaCava, Councilmember Shin, Deputy Mayor Fernandez, Mayor Sanchez, Mayor Ehlers, Councilmember Pikus, and Councilmember ContrerasAbsent (2)Mayor Snow, and Vice Mayor CazaresThe motion passed. (17 to 0)3.1Approval of Meeting Minutes Attachments | Public Comments1.Att. 1 - Meeting Minutes - 02132026 - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLD Here comes the list of names, like the Oscars, and who did what, on the consent agenda which was consented to – surprise! It’s over in seconds, not minutes even. It would be nice to know what the public speakers and Boardmembers discussed, without having to find it on the video. Most of us can read a brief or pithy description a lot faster, and it’s usually easier to understand, too, if the speaker has an accent or speaks too fast. I’m glad it now includes the roll call, so we can tell which members are chronically absent, and a link to the video in the minutes which saves us a few seconds finding it on the calendar. It’s a shame there’s no detail on the other items. Maybe that’s why so many recommended and approved corrections are still incomplete. Very disappointing. Is SANDAG so understaffed that it cannot provide proper minutes?Approved the minutes from its February 13, 2026, meeting. 3.2Policy Advisory Committee Actions Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - PAC Actions - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - FY 2025 TDA Claim Amendment - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLD Not much to see here. Why was the Public Safety Committee meeting cancelled. With all of the safety issues-unsafe bikeways, Del Mar bluffs that keep crumbling, the peripatetic Coaster service, road issues, and on and on, public safety should top the priority list, not kowtowing to so-called progressive State laws. Guess we don’t matter much, except for our taxes. Ratified the actions taken by the Policy Advisory Committees as noted in the report.3.3Chief Executive Officer Delegated Actions and Other Reportable Actions* Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - CEO Delegated Actions and Other Reportable Actions - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Investment Securities Transactions Activity - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - Sole Source Contract Awards - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Budgets Transfers and Amendments - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - Real Property Transfers - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf6.Att. 5 - Administrative Policy Actions - FY 2026, Q2 - BOD 02272026.pdfIn accordance with various Board Policies, this report summarized delegated and reportable actions taken by the Chief Executive Officer. This item was provided for information only. 3.4Authorization to Utilize AB 3090 Financing for the San Dieguito Lagoon Double-Track Project* Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - BOD AB 3090 Cover Report - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Discussion Memo - AB 3090.pdfCamilla RangItem 3.4, SANDAG Board member agenda 02.27.2026 Dear SANDAG Board members, Please see my attached letter for comment. Please reassure that the bridge and platform is accommodated for all FOUR train rerouting alternatives, including the favored Northern Yellow Line. Sincerely, Camilla RangAmy CheshireI hope you will ask for clarification on the following points before you vote on this agenda item: • To help SANDAG board members make an informed decision, we respectfully request that SANDAG staff clarify if it intends to make an explicit finding that this project is the highest priority project in the region, and the implications of this, such as any potential effect on the funding of other priority projects in the coming years. • If SANDAG intends to make such a finding, we respectfully request SANDAG staff clarify the justification for making this finding. If safety of the bridge is the reason, has it been determined that the bridge is unsafe or is expected to be unsafe in the near future despite ongoing maintenance? We are unaware of any prior assertion, including in the Coastal Commission Consistency Certification, that restoring safety to the bridge is the purpose of the project. • Why not continue to maintain the old bridge for the relatively short period needed to await the results of the Realignment EIR? • If the NYL is the best Realignment, how will it connect to the Bridge? • Has SANDAG developed the NYL to the same level as other routes and, if so, can those preliminary designs be viewed by the public now? PAUL the BOLDSo it sounds like you want to borrow Transnet Funds until 2029 rather than pay off the loan and end the tolls off SR125 as soon as you can. And this also would take away a bit from fixing the roads. And then, the discussion memo says that you wouldn’t get interest, so this would essentially be a loss for Transnet and would probably delay paying off the SR125 loan and ending the tolls. Not good. There’s got to be a better source, like delaying implementation of managed toll lanes.Approved the use of Assembly Bill 3090 (1992) financing authority to advance up to $62 million in TransNet Major Corridor funds for the San Dieguito Lagoon Double Track Project and authorize staff to pursue the required State Transportation Improvement Program amendment and AB 3090 reimbursement agreement with the California Transportation Commission.3.5Revised FY 2026 and FY 2027 to FY 2031 TransNet Program and Transit-Related Revenues* Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - BOD Revised FY26 and FY27 to FY31 TransNet Program and Transit-Related Revenues - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att.1 - Funding Programs - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - TransNet Short Term Update - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Updated Tables for Short Term Revenues - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLD You need to be real here. The US economy is in shambles. The cost of goods and services is soaring in many areas. Local government does not have a handle on it. San Diego’s budget deficit keeps increasing. My expectation is that people will cut back on their spending locally, recession or not. Even the Staff report says ‘TDA revenues generally follow a similar trajectory to TransNet revenues, but at a slower rate.’ And then, the forecast of $11 mil more in TDA sales tax revenues and $14 mil from TransNet is based on 2025 collections being about 2% over 2024 (less than the cost of living.) This is bound to mess up your financials and you should reject this estimate.Approved: The proposed revision to the FY 2026 TransNet and Transportation Development Act (TDA) program estimates; and The FY2027 to FY 2031 estimates and apportionments for TDA, Federal Transit Administration, and TransNet funds. 3.6Overview of Developments in the Financial Markets, Quarterly Finance Report as of December 31, 2025* Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - Overview of Developments in the Financial Markets - BOD 02272026-rev.pdf2.Att. 1 - Financial Market Review - BOD 02272026 V2.pdf3.Att. 2 - Local Economic Update and Sales Tax Revenues - BOD 02272026 V2.pdf4.Att. 3a -3e Investment and Debt Portfolio - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - TransNet Extension Quarterly Report - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLD The staff report says ‘economic activity remains positive and resilient. Inflation remains a present concern, tracking higher than national average, in tandem with continued uncertainty…’ I’m sure you are aware that San Diego and the County both have deficits, prices of goods and services range from increasing to outrageous, although a few areas are OK, and we keep hearing of job cuts. So the overall regional economy is far from stable. So I suggest that you do your own research on the current chaotic market conditions and take this with a grain of salt. This report provided an update on the latest developments in the financial markets, economy, sales tax revenues, and strategies being explored and implemented to minimize possible impacts to the TransNet Program. This item was provided for information only. 3.7Conflict of Interest Code Updates Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - Conflict of Interest Code Updates - BOD 09122025.pdf2.Att. 1 - REDLINE-Conflict of Interest Code Updates - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLD The designation of just certain people to file statements of economic interest is an invitation to conflict of interest and continued corruption. That you propose not to provide them to the code reviewing body, the County, is outrageous. Not sure why you want to exempt the Chief of Staff from filing Statements of economic interest. We need to know what a person of such importance is involved with. Same with the General Counsel. It is outrageous that you are exempting department heads from filing these forms, but not the subordinates. Glad you are including the Director of Accounting and Finance and the Director of Financial Planning, Budgets, and Grants in the filing requirements, but please consider having every employee at SANDA file a statement of economic interest. Anyone who have influence on SANDAG policy or operations should file a statement of economic interest.Approved the updated SANDAG Conflict of Interest Code.3.8TransNet Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program Proposed Fee Adjustment* Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - TransNet RTCIP Proposed Fee Adjustment - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Discussion Memo - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLD So the cost of construction index (CCI) is showing an increase of 3.9% for FY 2026 but you are only recommending a 2% fee increase. And this is for those new units where the average size went down from 1200 to 800 square feet over about 10 years. And from 2022 to 2026, the CCI went up 29.3% while the fee went up only 16.9%. I doubt it will work.Approved a 2% adjustment to the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program, raising the fee from $3,047.57 to $3,109.88 beginning July 1, 2026.3.9Proposed 2025 Program Budget Amendment: Payment of Award Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - Budget Amendment Payment of Award - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLD So the settlement of the Warrem case, where SANDAG did a retaliatory firing, was $4.2 mil. And if paid entirely out of the contingency reserve it will deplete the reserve by almost half, leaving far less than than the 10% established by policy. And the staff report simply says ‘any amount recovered from available insurance will be used to reimburse the Contingency Reserve,’ which does not at all sound like a sure thing. You should know, or have a good estimate of, what these amounts are. I suggest that the budget be looked at in its entirety to see about funding this huge award. Perhaps you should get some of the money from the guilty person. Approved the allocation of up to $4,216,250 from the Contingency Reserve in FY 2026 to fund costs associated with an arbitration judgement regarding a personnel concern.3.10Proposed Updates to Board Policies Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - Proposed Updates to Board Policies - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Board Policy No. 039 with Redline Changes - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - Board Policy No. 042 - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Proposed Board Policy No. 043 - BOD 02272026.pdfPAUL the BOLDThis looks good and a needed step in the right direction. The staff report says ‘The Board of Directors is asked to approve proposed changes to Board Policy No. 039, eliminate Board Policy No. 042, and create Board Policy No. 043.’ Yet policy 42 is still included (unredacted) in the attachments. I will assume that the others are the final versions. Policy 39: Deletion of Section 3.1.13 is totally wrongheaded and seems to encourage fraud. It is disappointing that this wasn’t reversed. Anyone, but especially the Audit Committee, should be able to recommend guidelines to detect and prevent fraud – me, you, or anyone else. In fact, if the Committee is recommending follow-up procedures for an audit per sec. 6.9, it seems that it may involve recommending anti-fraud guidelines. Glad policy 42 was canceled. Hope you renumber policy 43. New Policy 43 looks good. But I think Section 4 should also prohibit retaliation against witnesses in any related administrative or Court proceeding. Approved the proposed amendments to Board Policy No. 039, the deletion of Board Policy No. 042, and the creation of a new Board Policy No. 043.4.Tolling Back Office System Cooperative Agreement and Project Budget Amendment Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - Tolling Back Office System Cooperative Agreement and Project Budget Amendment - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - CIP No. 1400406 - New SR 125 Regional Tolling Back Office System - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - CIP No. 1400407 - New I-15 Regional Tolling Back Office System - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - CIP No. 1400412 - SR 125 Regional Tolling BOS Solution - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - CIP No. 1400413 - I-15 Regional Tolling BOS Solution - BOD 02272026.pdf6.Item 4 - Presentation - Back Office - BOD 02272026 .pdfPAUL the BOLDGreat that the project cost would go down from $33 mil if you did it by yourselves to $15 mil. Contingency fees at $2 mil (12.66%) are a bit high. Not sure why contingency fees for staff and consultants. Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) has pretty poor reviews, 1.5 out of 5 stars for 1.288 reviews. This one is typical: ‘Absolutely horrid website. Impossible to pay. Increased fees over posted. I have been a long time fast trak patron. Never any problems with the way the automated process work, and am a fan of fast track. First thing that upset me was when they changed the transponders and after a month of using the fast track lane (which is free for carpools). I was billed for all use because I did not have the new transponder. Second thing. My mother used the new system on the 73 being cashless. Tried to pay on line and system was too difficult for her to use. She asked me to help, and I thought it was probably her. No way, the web payment system is the worst commerce site that I have ever used. In addition, the 1 way toll was $7.30, almost 50% higher (mid day no traffic time). Toll Road should be ashamed of their service.’ So not sure why SANDAG chose this one. The price for SANDAG? Apart from this and the horrible reviews, the two existing Boards of Directors the Staff report mentions sound like a recipe for confusion. Please find a better toll system management company.Director of Regional Transportation Services Alex Estrella and Principal Economic Research Analyst Naomi Young presented the item. Public Comment: Cesar Javier, Blair Beekman, Paul the Bold, Andrea Ebbing, Marco Espinosa, Truth, Consuelo, The Original Dra, Gambler. Motioned by:Councilmember MorenoSeconded by:Councilmember Gaasterlandto authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute a Cooperative Agreement with the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) for back-office system tolling services for the Interstate 15 (I-15) and State Route 125 (SR 125) toll facilities. and approve the proposed amendments to the FY 2026 Program Budget for the new Regional Back Office System project (Capital Improvement Project Nos. 1400412 and 1400413).For (18)Mayor Duncan, Supervisor Anderson, Councilmember Gaasterland, Mayor Wells, Mayor White, Mayor Pro Tem Fisher, Vice Mayor Molina, Mayor Jones, Second Vice Chair Minto, Chair Heebner, Mayor Snow, First Vice Chair LaCava, Councilmember Shin, Mayor Sanchez, Vice Mayor Cazares, Mayor Ehlers, Councilmember Pikus, and Councilmember ContrerasAbsent (1)Deputy Mayor FernandezThe motion passed. (18 to 0)5.Flexible Fleets Pilot Grant Program Call for Projects Attachments | Public Comments1.Staff Report - Flexible Fleets PGP Call - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Flexible Fleets Call for Projects - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - Flexible Fleets Scoring Rubric - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Flexible Fleets Perform Metrics - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - Summary of FFGP Feedback - BOD 02272026.pdf6.Item 5 - Presentation - Flexible Fleets Pilot Grant Program - BOD 02272026.pdfGrants Program Manager Jenny Russo presented the item. Public Comments: Cesar Javier, Paul the Bold, Blair Beekman, The Original Dra, Truth, Consuelo, Gambler. Motioned by:Mayor SanchezSeconded by:Mayor Jonesto extend the meeting end time to 1 p.m. For (14)Mayor Duncan, Councilmember Gaasterland, Mayor Wells, Mayor Pro Tem Fisher, Vice Mayor Molina, Mayor Jones, Second Vice Chair Minto, Chair Heebner, Councilmember Shin, Mayor Sanchez, Vice Mayor Cazares, Mayor Ehlers, Councilmember Pikus, and Councilmember ContrerasAgainst (2)Supervisor Anderson, and Mayor SnowAbsent (3)Mayor White, First Vice Chair LaCava, and Deputy Mayor FernandezThe motion passed. (14 to 2)Motioned by:Mayor SanchezSeconded by:Second Vice Chair Mintoto approve the release of the Flexible Fleets Pilot Grant Program Call for Projects.For (12)Mayor Duncan, Councilmember Gaasterland, Mayor Pro Tem Fisher, Vice Mayor Molina, Mayor Jones, Second Vice Chair Minto, Chair Heebner, Mayor Snow, Councilmember Shin, Mayor Sanchez, Mayor Ehlers, and Councilmember ContrerasAgainst (1)Councilmember PikusAbsent (6)Supervisor Anderson, Mayor Wells, Mayor White, First Vice Chair LaCava, Deputy Mayor Fernandez, and Vice Mayor CazaresThe motion passed. (12 to 1)6.Adjournment Public Comments: Chair Heebner adjourned the meeting at 12:57 p.m. The next Board of Directors meeting is scheduled for March 13, 2026, at 9 a.m.No Item Selected Attachments (0) | Public Comments (0)This item has no attachments.1.Att. 1 - Meeting Minutes - 02132026 - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - PAC Actions - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - FY 2025 TDA Claim Amendment - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - BOD AB 3090 Cover Report - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Discussion Memo - AB 3090.pdf1.Staff Report - Conflict of Interest Code Updates - BOD 09122025.pdf2.Att. 1 - REDLINE-Conflict of Interest Code Updates - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - TransNet RTCIP Proposed Fee Adjustment - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Discussion Memo - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - Flexible Fleets PGP Call - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Flexible Fleets Call for Projects - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - Flexible Fleets Scoring Rubric - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Flexible Fleets Perform Metrics - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - Summary of FFGP Feedback - BOD 02272026.pdf6.Item 5 - Presentation - Flexible Fleets Pilot Grant Program - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - CEO Delegated Actions and Other Reportable Actions - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Investment Securities Transactions Activity - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - Sole Source Contract Awards - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Budgets Transfers and Amendments - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - Real Property Transfers - Jan 2026 - BOD 02272026.pdf6.Att. 5 - Administrative Policy Actions - FY 2026, Q2 - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - Proposed Updates to Board Policies - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - Board Policy No. 039 with Redline Changes - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - Board Policy No. 042 - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Proposed Board Policy No. 043 - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - BOD Revised FY26 and FY27 to FY31 TransNet Program and Transit-Related Revenues - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att.1 - Funding Programs - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - TransNet Short Term Update - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - Updated Tables for Short Term Revenues - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - Overview of Developments in the Financial Markets - BOD 02272026-rev.pdf2.Att. 1 - Financial Market Review - BOD 02272026 V2.pdf3.Att. 2 - Local Economic Update and Sales Tax Revenues - BOD 02272026 V2.pdf4.Att. 3a -3e Investment and Debt Portfolio - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - TransNet Extension Quarterly Report - BOD 02272026.pdf1.Staff Report - Tolling Back Office System Cooperative Agreement and Project Budget Amendment - BOD 02272026.pdf2.Att. 1 - CIP No. 1400406 - New SR 125 Regional Tolling Back Office System - BOD 02272026.pdf3.Att. 2 - CIP No. 1400407 - New I-15 Regional Tolling Back Office System - BOD 02272026.pdf4.Att. 3 - CIP No. 1400412 - SR 125 Regional Tolling BOS Solution - BOD 02272026.pdf5.Att. 4 - CIP No. 1400413 - I-15 Regional Tolling BOS Solution - BOD 02272026.pdf6.Item 4 - Presentation - Back Office - BOD 02272026 .pdf1.Staff Report - Budget Amendment Payment of Award - BOD 02272026.pdfThis item has no public commentPAUL the BOLD (Against)Great that the project cost would go down from $33 mil if you did it by yourselves to $15 mil. Contingency fees at $2 mil (12.66%) are a bit high. Not sure why contingency fees for staff and consultants. Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) has pretty poor reviews, 1.5 out of 5 stars for 1.288 reviews. This one is typical: ‘Absolutely horrid website. Impossible to pay. Increased fees over posted. I have been a long time fast trak patron. Never any problems with the way the automated process work, and am a fan of fast track. First thing that upset me was when they changed the transponders and after a month of using the fast track lane (which is free for carpools). I was billed for all use because I did not have the new transponder. Second thing. My mother used the new system on the 73 being cashless. Tried to pay on line and system was too difficult for her to use. She asked me to help, and I thought it was probably her. No way, the web payment system is the worst commerce site that I have ever used. In addition, the 1 way toll was $7.30, almost 50% higher (mid day no traffic time). Toll Road should be ashamed of their service.’ So not sure why SANDAG chose this one. The price for SANDAG? Apart from this and the horrible reviews, the two existing Boards of Directors the Staff report mentions sound like a recipe for confusion. Please find a better toll system management company.PAUL the BOLD (For)This looks good and a needed step in the right direction. The staff report says ‘The Board of Directors is asked to approve proposed changes to Board Policy No. 039, eliminate Board Policy No. 042, and create Board Policy No. 043.’ Yet policy 42 is still included (unredacted) in the attachments. I will assume that the others are the final versions. Policy 39: Deletion of Section 3.1.13 is totally wrongheaded and seems to encourage fraud. It is disappointing that this wasn’t reversed. Anyone, but especially the Audit Committee, should be able to recommend guidelines to detect and prevent fraud – me, you, or anyone else. In fact, if the Committee is recommending follow-up procedures for an audit per sec. 6.9, it seems that it may involve recommending anti-fraud guidelines. Glad policy 42 was canceled. Hope you renumber policy 43. New Policy 43 looks good. But I think Section 4 should also prohibit retaliation against witnesses in any related administrative or Court proceeding. PAUL the BOLD (Against) So the settlement of the Warrem case, where SANDAG did a retaliatory firing, was $4.2 mil. And if paid entirely out of the contingency reserve it will deplete the reserve by almost half, leaving far less than than the 10% established by policy. And the staff report simply says ‘any amount recovered from available insurance will be used to reimburse the Contingency Reserve,’ which does not at all sound like a sure thing. You should know, or have a good estimate of, what these amounts are. I suggest that the budget be looked at in its entirety to see about funding this huge award. Perhaps you should get some of the money from the guilty person. PAUL the BOLD (No Position) So the cost of construction index (CCI) is showing an increase of 3.9% for FY 2026 but you are only recommending a 2% fee increase. And this is for those new units where the average size went down from 1200 to 800 square feet over about 10 years. And from 2022 to 2026, the CCI went up 29.3% while the fee went up only 16.9%. I doubt it will work.PAUL the BOLD (Against) The designation of just certain people to file statements of economic interest is an invitation to conflict of interest and continued corruption. That you propose not to provide them to the code reviewing body, the County, is outrageous. Not sure why you want to exempt the Chief of Staff from filing Statements of economic interest. We need to know what a person of such importance is involved with. Same with the General Counsel. It is outrageous that you are exempting department heads from filing these forms, but not the subordinates. Glad you are including the Director of Accounting and Finance and the Director of Financial Planning, Budgets, and Grants in the filing requirements, but please consider having every employee at SANDA file a statement of economic interest. Anyone who have influence on SANDAG policy or operations should file a statement of economic interest.PAUL the BOLD (Against) The staff report says ‘economic activity remains positive and resilient. Inflation remains a present concern, tracking higher than national average, in tandem with continued uncertainty…’ I’m sure you are aware that San Diego and the County both have deficits, prices of goods and services range from increasing to outrageous, although a few areas are OK, and we keep hearing of job cuts. So the overall regional economy is far from stable. So I suggest that you do your own research on the current chaotic market conditions and take this with a grain of salt. PAUL the BOLD (Against) You need to be real here. The US economy is in shambles. The cost of goods and services is soaring in many areas. Local government does not have a handle on it. San Diego’s budget deficit keeps increasing. My expectation is that people will cut back on their spending locally, recession or not. Even the Staff report says ‘TDA revenues generally follow a similar trajectory to TransNet revenues, but at a slower rate.’ And then, the forecast of $11 mil more in TDA sales tax revenues and $14 mil from TransNet is based on 2025 collections being about 2% over 2024 (less than the cost of living.) This is bound to mess up your financials and you should reject this estimate.Camilla Rang (Against)Item 3.4, SANDAG Board member agenda 02.27.2026 Dear SANDAG Board members, Please see my attached letter for comment. Please reassure that the bridge and platform is accommodated for all FOUR train rerouting alternatives, including the favored Northern Yellow Line. Sincerely, Camilla RangAmy Cheshire (Against)I hope you will ask for clarification on the following points before you vote on this agenda item: • To help SANDAG board members make an informed decision, we respectfully request that SANDAG staff clarify if it intends to make an explicit finding that this project is the highest priority project in the region, and the implications of this, such as any potential effect on the funding of other priority projects in the coming years. • If SANDAG intends to make such a finding, we respectfully request SANDAG staff clarify the justification for making this finding. If safety of the bridge is the reason, has it been determined that the bridge is unsafe or is expected to be unsafe in the near future despite ongoing maintenance? We are unaware of any prior assertion, including in the Coastal Commission Consistency Certification, that restoring safety to the bridge is the purpose of the project. • Why not continue to maintain the old bridge for the relatively short period needed to await the results of the Realignment EIR? • If the NYL is the best Realignment, how will it connect to the Bridge? • Has SANDAG developed the NYL to the same level as other routes and, if so, can those preliminary designs be viewed by the public now? PAUL the BOLD (-)So it sounds like you want to borrow Transnet Funds until 2029 rather than pay off the loan and end the tolls off SR125 as soon as you can. And this also would take away a bit from fixing the roads. And then, the discussion memo says that you wouldn’t get interest, so this would essentially be a loss for Transnet and would probably delay paying off the SR125 loan and ending the tolls. Not good. There’s got to be a better source, like delaying implementation of managed toll lanes.PAUL the BOLD (No Position) Not much to see here. Why was the Public Safety Committee meeting cancelled. With all of the safety issues-unsafe bikeways, Del Mar bluffs that keep crumbling, the peripatetic Coaster service, road issues, and on and on, public safety should top the priority list, not kowtowing to so-called progressive State laws. Guess we don’t matter much, except for our taxes. PAUL the BOLD (Against) Here comes the list of names, like the Oscars, and who did what, on the consent agenda which was consented to – surprise! It’s over in seconds, not minutes even. It would be nice to know what the public speakers and Boardmembers discussed, without having to find it on the video. Most of us can read a brief or pithy description a lot faster, and it’s usually easier to understand, too, if the speaker has an accent or speaks too fast. I’m glad it now includes the roll call, so we can tell which members are chronically absent, and a link to the video in the minutes which saves us a few seconds finding it on the calendar. It’s a shame there’s no detail on the other items. Maybe that’s why so many recommended and approved corrections are still incomplete. Very disappointing. Is SANDAG so understaffed that it cannot provide proper minutes?