REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Title
Action on City Position on Proposed League of California Cities’ 2024 Resolution on Fair and Equal Treatment of All Governmental Officials at All Levels
Report
COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency
BACKGROUND
The League of California Cities (Cal Cities) will hold its Annual Conference and Expo in Long Beach, California on October 16-18, 2024. As part of the Annual Conference and Expo, Cal Cities will convene its General Assembly where the member cities’ voting delegates will debate and consider general and petitioned resolutions. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy.
City councils must appoint a voting delegate to vote during the General Assembly. As part of the September 24, 2024 Council Meeting, the City Council designated Councilmember Park as the City’s voting delegate.
This report transmits the Cal Cities 2024 Resolutions Packet (Attachment 1), which contains the proposed resolution that will be considered at the Cal Cities’ General Assembly on October 18, 2024, supporting letters from city officials, and an analysis by Cal Cities. Cal Cities encourages each city council to consider the resolution and determine a city position so that cities’ voting delegates can represent their respective city’s position on the resolution.
Staff recommends Council discussion and action on a City position on the proposed Cal Cities 2024 Resolution on Fair and Equal Treatment of All Governmental Officials at All Levels submitted by the City of Glendora (Cal Cities 2024 Resolution). Additionally, the voting delegate should be authorized to cast a vote consistent with the City Council’s position during the Cal Cities 2024 General Assembly.
DISCUSSION
Below is a description of the proposed Cal Cities 2024 Resolution followed by background and an analysis prepared by staff and the City’s legislative consultant, Townsend Public Affairs.
Resolution of the General Assembly of the League of California Cities Calling for the California Legislature to Enact Laws That Ensure That “What Applies to One, Applies to All” in the Fair and Equal Treatment of All Government Officials at All Levels in the State of California
The City of Glendora has submitted a resolution for consideration related to equitable treatment of local and state elected officials. The resolution would ask the Cal Cities to call on the Governor and Legislature to adopt a policy that states:
The California State Legislature shall not enact, and the Governor shall not sign into law, any law or regulation that applies solely to elected officials of California cities and counties, unless such law or regulation also applies equally to members of the California State Assembly and Senate. This prohibition shall not apply to laws or regulations affecting the inherent powers of the legislative branch under the California Constitution.
Concurrence
Any resolution submitted to the General Assembly must be concurred by five cities or by city officials from at least five or more cities. The proposed Cal Cities 2024 Resolution received concurrence from the following officials:
• April A. Verlato, Mayor, City of Arcadia
• Robert Gonzales, Mayor, City of Azusa
• Tim Hepburn, Mayor, City of La Verne
• Bill Uphoff, Mayor, City of Lomita
• John M. Cruikshank, Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Background
Each year the California State Legislature introduces between 2,000 to 3,000 bills, many of which proposed to enact, or amend, laws pertaining to the roles, responsibilities, and laws that govern the conduct of elected officials. These proposed laws often apply solely to local elected officials, and not to state or federal representatives, nor to state-level constitutional officers. In addition, many legislative proposals will impact the actions that local elected officials are permitted to take, while not applying to elected officials at the state level.
Over time, there have been numerous laws enacted that apply to locally elected officials, but not to other elected officials. Some of the more high-profile laws include the Ralph M. Brown Act relating to the public meetings and transparency, the Public Records Act, portions of the Political Reform Act of 1974, and recent laws limiting the ability of locally elected officials to take certain actions related to local planning and zoning, particularly as it relates to housing. Additionally, the Legislature has adopted many laws which apply solely to elected officials within certain jurisdictions, such as streamlining of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to facilitate the expedited review of certain projects.
In each of these cases, the Legislature has found that there is a compelling need for these laws to apply at the local level, but have not maintained consistency by applying the same laws to their own members. In some situations, such as legislation related to local planning and zoning, as well as to CEQA approvals, the underlying governmental actions are taken at the local level, not the state level, so it wouldn’t necessarily make sense to have those laws apply to state officials; however, laws such as the Brown Act and the Public Records Act specifically exempt members of the Legislature from their provisions, and instead the Legislature has approved laws that are less stringent on state officials than on their local counterparts.
Analysis
There may be constitutional constraints related to the proposed resolution as discussed below.
The proposed resolution contains the provision, “This prohibition shall not apply to laws or regulations affecting the inherent powers of the legislative branch under the California Constitution.” As this sentence notes, the California State Constitution provides broad latitude for the State Legislature to enact laws to govern affairs within the state. While the Legislature does have constraints on types of legislation that can be considered due to specific provisions within sections of the State Constitution, for the most part the Legislature has broad latitude to approve laws as they see fit. If necessary, courts have the ability to review laws to ensure that they are not in conflict with provisions of the US Constitution or State Constitution; additionally, voters have the ability to reject or modify approved laws through the use of the referendum and initiative process.
Additionally, the proposed resolution provides direction to Cal Cities to “call upon the Governor of the State of California and the elected members of the California Legislature, including all members of the Senate and Assembly to adopt the following policy:”; however, the Legislature does not adopt policies. The closest thing to adopting a policy that the Legislature can do is to approve something as part of the Rules of the House; however, these do not carry the weight of law and can be easily suspended by a majority vote at any time. In order to carry out the policy that is being advanced within the proposed resolution, the Legislature would need to approve a bill, which would then need to be signed into law by the Governor. However, many of the examples cited as need for the bill are contained within the California Constitution and have been approved by voters, in addition to, or in place of, the State Legislature. Any of the provisions that are currently within the State Constitution, or are added at a later date, would supersede statutory provisions, or House Rules, approved by the Legislature, therefore it would make the most sense for the proposed resolution to be pursued as an amendment to the State Constitution.
Relevant City Policy
On December 12, 2023, the City Council adopted eleven (11) 2024 Legislative Advocacy Positions (LAPs). While these LAPs cover a range of issues and provide direction on a diverse number of issues, there is no position statement within the LAPs that applies directly to the proposed resolution. However, there are several position statements within the LAPs that are aimed at maintaining local decision-making authority and opposing the state mandating local agencies carry out certain activities without providing adequate funding and resources and the City’s LAP Policy outlines similar legislative guiding principles.
Recommended Position
The proposed Cal Cities 2024 Resolution requires Council consideration because there is no City policy or Legislative Advocacy Position relative to the issue and the proposed resolution does not directly impact City operations. As such, the City Council should consider taking one of the following positions with regard to the proposed Cal Cities 2024 Resolution: “Approve”, “Disapprove”, or “Abstain”.
It is important to note that the proposed Resolution may be amended during the deliberation process at the Cal Cities 2024 General Assembly and, should a resolution be adopted, further analysis will be conducted by Cal Cities staff and adjustments/compromises to the proposed actions may occur through the Cal Cities legislative advocacy process.
Should the Council take a position on the proposed Cal Cities 2024 Resolution, it is recommended that the Council authorize its voting delegate, Councilmember Kevin Park, to cast a vote consistent with the City Council’s position during the Cal Cities 2024 General Assembly.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is a governmental organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no costs associated with this report or action aside from administrative time to prepare and review this report.
The City has an existing agreement with Townsend Public Affairs for state and federal legislative advocacy services, which includes developing and implementing a legislative strategy. These services are included at no additional cost as part of the consultant’s monthly service fee.
COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the City’s legislative consultant, Townsend Public Affairs and the City Attorney’s Office.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email clerk@santaclaraca.gov <mailto:clerk@santaclaraca.gov>.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
1. Council discussion and action on the proposed Cal Cities 2024 Resolution, which aims to ensure fair and equal treatment of all governmental officials at all levels; and
2. Authorize the City’s voting delegate, Councilmember Park, to cast a vote consistent with the City Council’s position during the Cal Cities 2024 General Assembly.
Staff
Prepared by: Christine Jung, Assistant to the City Manager
Approved by: Jovan D. Grogan, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. League of California Cities 2024 Resolutions Packet