Report 2018-120 Recommendation 11 Responses

Report 2018-120: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission: Its Failure to Perform Key Responsibilities Has Allowed Ongoing Harm to the San Francisco Bay (Release Date: May 2019)

Recommendation #11 To: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission

To ensure that it maximizes the efficiency and effectiveness of its enforcement and permitting programs, the commission should by January 2020 simplify its system for prioritizing enforcement cases, to help it focus its enforcement efforts on cases with the greatest potential for harming the Bay.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2021

The Commission prioritizes cases by relative harm using in order of precedence: 1) Significant harm; 2) Major harm to the Bay; 3) Significant limitations on public access; 4) Unpermitted work that is permittable; 5) Case context integration; 6) Grouping cases (ten or more cases for similar issues with the same respondent); 7) Pairing cases (2 or 3 cases of the same respondent for different issues).

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

The Commission has begun using a system to prioritize cases by relative harm to the bay which integrates its existing prioritization system.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

Staff has reviewed the prioritization system with guidance from the Enforcement Committee, and the Committee concurred that the system is currently adequate to provide an impact score for each case and to do so with minimal staff time and effort and in a manner that allows staff to focus on cases with the greatest potential for harm. Earlier this year, as previously reported, the Committee approved a practice of prioritizing cases in the following manner: (1) Significant harm (using the prioritization impact scoring framework); (2) Major harm to the Bay; (3) Significant limitations on public access (also using impact scoring framework); (4) Unpermitted work that is permittable; (5) Case context integration; 6) Grouping cases; and (7) Pairing cases.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

The Commission's response makes it clear that they continue to disagree with our assessment that its system for prioritizing cases is too complex and have continued to use the system largely as designed. As the system was relatively new when we assessed it, we would need to perform additional audit work to determine whether its use in practice is effective.

1-Year Agency Response

Throughout the year, staff have been reviewing the prioritization system with guidance from the Enforcement Committee. The Committee has noted that the system is adequate to provide an impact score for each case. At a meeting on March 12, 2020, the Committee approved a practice of prioritizing cases in following manner:

1) Significant harm (using the prioritization impact scoring framework); 2) Major harm to the Bay,

3) Significant limitations on public access (also using impact scoring framework); 4) Unpermitted work that is permittable; 5) Case context integration; 6) Grouping Cases; 7) Pairing Cases. A review of impact scoring and how it affects prioritization is ongoing.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

This recommendation is partially implemented. As the commission notes, it has approved a practice for prioritizing cases; however, it has not yet assessed whether that practice is effective.

6-Month Agency Response

On September 25, 2019, staff briefed the Enforcement Committee on the case prioritization system, and the Committee has determined that the prioritization system is currently adequate to identify violation types that require swift action. Staff will continue to review the prioritization system, and will determine how to improve the system and will brief the Enforcement Committee on their recommendations in 2020.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

As described at recent Enforcement Committee meetings, staff is examining the prioritization system and determining how it may be simplified and staff will be providing a report to the Enforcement Committee in the next several months.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

All Recommendations in 2018-120

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.