HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/28/1994 B A K E R S F I E L D
Patricia M. Smith, Chair
Patricia J. DeMond
Lynn Edwards
Staff: Trudy Slater
AGENDA
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
Thursday, April 28, 1994
11:30 a.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
Second Floor - City Hall
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA
1. ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF APRIL 7, 1994 MINUTES
3. PRESENTATIONS
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. CITY OF PASADENA REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF RESOLUTION #7045
ERADICATING RAMPANT VIOLENCE. NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES RESOLUTION
ON STOPPING CRIME AND VIOLENCE IN OUR CITIES AND TOWNS
B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ASSEMBLY BILL AB 2667 (MCDONALD), VEHICLES:
FORFEITURES
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. CITY OF MODESTO REQUEST FOR SUPPORT TO AMEND STATE LAW TO ALLOW
CITIES TO IMPOSE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ON THE PERPETRATOR AND THE
PARENTS OF MINOR CHILDREN WHO COMMIT ACTS OF GRAFFITI VANDALISM
B. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION REGARDING
MARZOLF VS. PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC
7. ADJOURNMENT
TS:jp
FILE COPY
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Legislative and Litigation Committee of the
City Council will hold a Special Meeting for the purpose of a Committee Meeting on
Thursday, April 28, 1994, at 11:30 a.m., in the City Manager's Conference Room on the
second floor of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, to consider:
1. ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF APRIL 7, 1994 MINUTES
3. PRESENTATIONS
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. CITY OF PASADENA REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF RESOLUTION #7045.
ERADICATING RAMPANT VIOLENCE - NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
RESOLUTION ON STOPPING CRIME AND VIOLENCE IN OUR CITIES AND
TOWNS
B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ASSEMBLY BILL AB 2667 (MCDONALD),
VEHICLES: FORFEITURES
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. CITY OF MODESTO REQUEST FOR SUPPORT TO AMEND STATE LAW TO
ALLOW CITIES TO IMPOSE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ON THE
PERPETRATOR AND THE PARENTS OF MINOR CHILDREN WHO COMMIT
ACTS OF GRAFFITI VANDALISM
B. PROCEEDINGS BEFORETHE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION REGARDING
MARZOLF VS. PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC
7. ADJOURNMENT
Trudy Slater:, A~inistrative/[,nalyst
BAKERSFIELD
Staff: ,, Patricia J. DeMond
Lynn Edwards
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
Thursday, April 7, 1994
12:15 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
1. ROLL CALL
Members present: Councilmember Patricia M. Smith, Chair; Councilmember
Patricia J. DeMond; and Councilmember Lynn Edwards
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 3, 1994
Minutes were approved as submitted.
3. PRESENTATIONS
None
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
None
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
April 7, 1994
Page -2-
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
1. AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAFFER 9.13 OF THE BAKERSFIELD
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LOITERING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ENGAGING IN A PROSTITUTION OFFENSE
Discussion ensued on the issue, and Deputy City Attorney Michael Allford reported
that the State Attorney General had been asked to issue an opinion as to the legality
of local municipalities legislating in the area of prostitution related offenses due to
State intention to occupy that field. It was indicated that a response from the
Attorney General could be received within three to four months. The Committee
deferred action on this item until such time as the Attorney General's opinion is
received by the City.
2. AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 9.19 OF THE BAKERSFIELD
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LOITERING FOR PURPOSES OF
DRUG-RELATED ACTMTIES.
Discussion ensued on the issues of loitering for the purposes of drug-related
activities, and no concerns similar to those surrounding proposed Chapter 9.13
occurred. It was motioned, seconded and approved to send the March 17 version
of Chapter 9.19 back to the Council for implementation. As there have been
substantial changes in the document, it will require another first reading.'
A committee report reflecting recommendations on both proposed Chapter 9.13. and
9.19 will be prepared for the meeting of April 20 as directed by Council.
6. NEW BUSINESS
1. CITY OF PASADENA REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF RESOLUTION #7045
-ERADICATING RAMPANT VIOLENCE
Members of the committee reviewed the resolution from the City of Pasadena as
well as a proposed resolution from the National League of Cities. Staff were
directed to redraft the League's more general version to find a better fit for the City
of Bakersfield and report back at the next Committee meeting.
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
April 7, 1994
Page -3-
2. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ASSEMBLY BILL AB 2667 (McDONALD),
VEHICLES: FORFEITURES
As the law which allows for vehicles forfeitures is new, staff will gather information
on the actual impacts the passage of such a bill in the City of Bakersfield would have
upon the community. Staff will report back at the next meeting.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 1:10 p.m.
Staff In Attendance: City Manager Alan Tandy, Acting City Attorney Judy Skousen, Police
Chief Steve Brummer, Deputy City Attorney Michael Afford, Police Lieutenant Bill Horton,
Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater
'I-l's.-jp
BAKERSFIELD POLICE
MEMORANDUM
April 21, 1994
To: Council Legislative and Litigation Committee
From: S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police~
Subject: Analysis of Proposed Assembly Bill AB 2667 - Vehicle Forfeitures
Police department staff has researched the impact of impound and forfeiture of vehicles
used in criminal acts of prostitution. The attached memorandum represents the findings
of that research.
BAKERSFIELD POLICE
MEMORANDUM
APRIL 11, 1994
TO: CHIEF S. BRUMMER
FROM: LIEUTENANT B. HORTON, ADMINISTRATIVE VICE/NARCOTICS DETAIL
SUBJECT: FORFEITURE OF VEHICLES USED IN PROSTITUTION (AB 2667)
I have reviewed and researched AB 2667 (McDonald) Bill allowing specified
cities to enact local ordinances to impound and forfeit vehicles that are
used in the criminal act of prostitution.
There are several concerns that I have with attempting to enforce this type
of ordinance, if we were to enact one:
1. AB 2667 requires that there has to be a prior conviction for
the specific section of PC 647(b).
2. It also is suggested that the defendant be advised not to use
the vehicle again for the act of prostitution, given a prior
warning.
There are several exemptions to enforcement of this ordinance that would
prevent the forfeiture of vehicles:
1. If the vehicle is owned by another person;
2. If the vehicle is community property; and
3. If the vehicle is the only vehicle that the defendant's family
has available.
These same problems are ones that we have had to deal with in the
forfeiture of vehicles seized in narcotics cases. In these narcotics cases,
we have found it is extremely difficult to accomplish.
In an attempt to find out how effective the program has been in other
areas, I contacted the followin.c, police departments:
1. Long Beach: Lt. Jones advised that even though his agency
has been given the authority to enact a local ordinance, they
have not. He states that the requirements imposed by AB
2667 are too restrictive and makes the ordinance ineffective.
2. Signal Hill: Sgt. Cravens and Det. M. Ruzzio both stated that
their City has not passed a city ordinance at this time for the
same reasons as stated by Lt. Jones from Long Beach.
3. San Diego: Lt. Kendall also stated that their agency is not
enforcing AB 2667 because their City has not enacted a city
ordinance. He cited the same reasons as Long Beach and
Signal Hill.
4. I also contacted Oakland Police Department, but at this time
I have not received a call back.
It would appear that AB 2667 was well intended to assist law enforcement
in its fight against prostitution; however, there are just too many restrictions
on enforcement. It is not working in other areas and it doesn't appear that
it would work in our community.
BH:plp
AB 2667 (McDonald) - Vehicles; Forfeitures
In bill text, brackets have special meaning:
[A> <Al contains added text, and ..
[D> <D] contains deleted text.
California 1993-94 Regular Session
Amended
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 14, 1994
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2667
Introduced by Assembly Member McDonald
February 3, 1994
An act to amend Section 22659.5 of the Vehicle Code, relating to
vehicles IA> , and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect
immediately <A].
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2667, as amended, McDonald. Vehicles: forfeitures.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 1999, the County of San
Diego, any city in that county, and the City of Oakland to adopt an
ordinance establishing a 5-year pilot program implementing procedures
for declaring any motor vehicle a public nuisance when used in the
commission of an act of prostitution, as specified, and there is a
conviction of the underlying offense, except in specified circumstances.
This bill would additionally allow the City of Long Beach [A> and
the City of Signal Hill <A] to establish a 5,year pilot program
implementing the described procedures and IA> would <A] make a related
change.
IA> This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as
an urgency statute. <A]
Vote: [D> majority <D] [A> 2/3 <A] . Appropriation: no. Fiscal
AB 2667 (McDonald) - Vehicles; Forfeitures Page 2
(CitYlink, 3-30-94)
committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 22659.5 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
22659.5. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the County
of San Diego, any city in that county, the City of Oakland, [A> the City
of Signal Hill, <Al and the City of Long Beach may adopt an ordinance
establishing a five-year pilot program which implements procedures for
declaring any motor vehicle a public nuisance when the vehicle is used
in the commission of an act in violation of subdivision (b) of Section
647 of the Penal Code, and there is a conviction of the underlying
offense.
(b) The ordinance may also include procedures to enjoin and abate
the declared nuisance by ordering the defendant not to use the vehicle
again for purposes of violating subdivision (b) of Section 647 of the
Penal Code and authorizing the temporary impoundment of the vehicle that
the court has declared a nuisance if the defendant violates the order
within one year of the court's declaration that the vehicle is a
nuisance.
(c) The only action that may be taken to enjoin and abate the
declared nuisance are those actions specified in subdivision (b).
(d) Any procedures implemented pursuant to this section shall ensure
that no vehicle shall be declared a nuisance in either of the following
circumstances:
(1) The vehicle is stolen, unless the identity of the legal and
registered owners of the vehicle cannot reasonably be ascertained.
(2) The vehicle is owned by another, or there is a community
property interest in the vehicle owned by a person other than the
defendant and the vehicle is the only one available to the defendant's
immediate family that may be operated on the highway with a class 3 or
class 4 ddver's license.
(e) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1,
ID> 2000 <D] IA> 1999 <A] , and as of that date is repealed, unless a
.later enacted statute, which is enacted before January 1, ID> 2000 <DJ
. AB 2667 (McDonald) - Vehicles; Forfeitures Page 3
(Citylink, 3-30-94)
IA> 1999 <A], deletes or extends that date.
IA> SEC. 2. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the
meaning of Article IV of the ConstitutiOn and shall go into immediate
effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: <A]
IA> In order to authorize the City of Long Beach and the City of Signal
Hill to participate in the pilot program authorized by specified
provisions of the Vehicle Code at the earliest possible time, it is
necessary that this act take effect immediately. <Al
END OF REPORT
AB 2667 (McDonald) - Vehicles; Forfeitures Page 4
(Citylink, 3-30-94)
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2667 (McDonald) As Amended: March 14, 1994.
ASSEMBLY ACTIONS:
COMMITTEE PUB. S. VOTE 8-0 COMMITTEE VOTE
DIGEST
Urgency statute. 2/3 vote required.
Under current law a five-year pilot project authorizes local governments in
San Diego County and the City of Oakland, to pass ordinances to allow for the
impoundment of a vehicle after the vehicle has been declared a nuisance for
having been used to commit or solicit an act of prostitution, and the
defendant has violated a nuisance abatement order by again using the Car to
commit such a violation.
This bill adds the Cities of Long Beach and Signal Hill to the group of local
governments authorized to impound vehicles used to commit prostitution, as
specified above.
FISCAL EFFECT
Unknown
COMMENTS
According to the author, the City of Long Beach has requested inclusion in a
.pilot program established during the 1993 legislative year. The program
authoriZes any of certain, specified counties and cities to pass an ordinance
allowing any vehicle used in the commission of an act of prostitution to be
declared a public nuisance.
Existing law was intended to create a five-year.pilot program. It will be
automatically repealed after five years, in 1999; unless re-enacted by the
legislature. As introduced, this bill extended the automatic repeal date by
one year, to 2000. Presumably, this was to give Long Beach and Signal Hill
the benefit of a full five years. In lieu of extending the sunset date, this
bill now adds an urgency clause, which would allow Long Beach and Signal Hill
to participate in the program during the pendency of its first year.
Paul M. Gerowitz.
445-3268
END OF REPORT
~ FRO~ MODESTO CITV MGR 04.11.1994 04:16 P. 2
Mayor (209) 577-~221
~,' ~lch~rd A. ~n8 . I*'~X: (20~) ~71.~!28
, Councilm~m~r~ ,. ~ Clly Hall
David E. ~osdlll , , ~ 801 lilh 'Slr~l
Kenni ~Jedmen , , . M~csto, CA
Janlne M~lanah~n ~ ' ' TDD: (2~) 5269211
~a.k T. U~tO~ ~ ""May City
o...,,.,,o. , or and Council
~ ' , , lm0almd Only
March 23,. 1994
,
., TO: " All May~rs of the State,of Cali ~ornta
~ FROM~ ' RiChard h~ Lan~ , Mayor' } '
CT.:
SU~J~ "~raf.fltt..,Vandalism ' ""
On ~arch '8~, 1994~ tho, ~ode~t~ C:~y Count.L1 adopted ~he enclosed
'' resolution whfch 'we. f~eI t~ vital .and neceasa~ to address ,the
, " exploding prbblem"of graffiti.. Our reaolut[on asks for ~he
to amend the seats law allowing for c~tlea an~ Other public
agenclos ~tO a~0pt ordinances LmpoSt~g'. financial responsibility on
.both the perpetrator an~ ~th, pa~ente',of'mtnor ch~dre~ ~ho commit
acts of graffiti Vandalism~ ' ' : ' '
~ Up un%il now,. only. /the individual property'oWner who ~was
vandallz'od by gho graffiti' could take steps 'and pursue
roetltutt, on through the court. Oar propo,al:would allow ~or
administrative process to be'e~tabit'S~ed, which wou~d provlde for
'cleanup eozta,~aa well an admin~stra~ve f~ne ,up ~o.($1,000 from
the mfnor'and tho.mlnor'z p~rents. This .wOuld 'remove tho burden
' . of action from the:court:'s, whos* caseload ts now. currently'
Overwhelming
' ~If" you~would like ~' supPort this change .In state law,. w~ would
encourage ~you to.contact your. local orate Segator e~d mombsr
' ~. tho Aeaemb[y. ~e hope go have an ,introduced bill soon f°r 'this
leg~slatLon, an'd hopefully some reltef~'~o this sor~oua
'' 8hou~d'?You havo'.any questions, or would like moro ~nf°r~atlon/
pleaee cal~ the City ~aneger's Offlce,-at {209) 577-5223.
~. ~ R~chard A; Lang,
, MaYor '
cc:.. City .council '
~ League of California' Cities
City Pride - Citywide
~ Prlnr~ on Re~.vcled ~per
MODESTO CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 94-149
A RESOLUTION URGING LOCAL LEGISLATORS TO
SUPPORT AN AMENDMENT TO STATE LAW ALLOWING.
CITIES AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES TO ADOPT
ORDINANCES IMPOSING FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
ON BOTH THE PERPETRATOR AND THE PARENTS OF
MINOR CHILDREN WHO COMMIT ACTS OF GRAFFITI
VANDALISM.
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to develop a new
ordinance which would deal effectively with tho rampant graffit!
problem and which would make parents of minors who commit acts of
graffiti vandalism financially responsible for both restitution
and a fine, and
WHEREAS, it is possible that without a change in State ·
law, such an ordinance could be subject to challenge, and
WHEREAS, graffiti victims do have recourse agains~ a
minor offender and the minor's parents pursupnt to Civil Code
Section 1714.1, as that section gives a victim the right to file
a civil action in court to recover damages of up to $10,000, and
WHEREAS, although victims do have recourse as stated
above, the City Council prefers to adopt its suggested
legislation as a preferable alternative because It provides
an administratiye procedure that is outside the overburdened
court system, a copy of the proposed legislation is attached
hereto entitled "New Governmen~ Code ~53069.4", and
WHEREAS, existing law permits cities to clean up
graffiti with City funds, however, the City's proposed
legislation would go further to allow the City to recover the
PNUM MODESTO CITY MGR 04. 11. 1994 04:17 P. ~ e
clean-up costs plus an administrative fine of up to $1,000 from
the minor and the minor's parents tn an administrative
proceeding, and
WHEREAB, in most cases ~.f an.administrative proceeding
is held~ no cou=t action would be requl~ed~ as the
o~der would have the same effect as a money ~udgmen~ and could be
collec[ed through a lien procedure on any real properly o~ned by
[he parent or parents,
~OW, ?HEREFORE~ BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the
Cl[y o~ Nodesto that tt hereby urges local legisla[ors [o support
an amendment to stale [a~ allo~ln~ ct[les and othe~ publ'tc
a~encies [o adop[ o~dinances ~mposing financial ~esponsiblltt¥
both ~he perpetrator and ~s parents o~ mino= children ~ho commt[
acts of graffiti vandalism~ a copy of 8aid proposed legislation
ts attached here[o en=i[le~ '°~e~ Government Code S53069,4".
03/1o/e4
FROM MODESTO CIT~? MGR 04,11.1994 04:17 P. 5
The foregoing resolution was introduced at e regular
meeting of the Council of the City of Modeato held on the 8th
day of March, 1994, by Counctlmember McClanahan, who moved its
adoption, which motion being dul~ seconded b~ Councllmember
Friedman, was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted
by th~ following vote:
AYES: Councllmembers: Cogdlll, Dobbs, Friedman,
McClana~an, Muratore, Mayor Long
NOES: Counci lmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Patterson
ATTEBT: OrlgJna~
NORRINE COYLE, City Clerk
(SZAL)
MiCHeL D, MZLZCH, City Attorney .
FROM MODESTO CITY MGR 04.11.1994 84:18 P. G
NEW GOVERNMENT CODE S5306~.4
A. "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in
Government Code Section 53069.3, or Civil Code Section
17~4.1, or Penal Code Sections 594(a)(1), 640.5(a), or
640.6, a city, county, or city and county, (hereinafter
"local public entity") may provide by ordinance for
payment of an administrative fine and for restitution
by both the minor, and the parent or parents hawing
custody and control of such minor, administratively
found to have created or caused graffiti as that term
is defined in Government Code Section 53069.3. Such
fines may include or separately state all costs
reasonably incurred by the local public entity in
removing, cleaning up or covering over the minor's
graffiti. The administrative proceeding may be held
upon ten (10) days notice as provided in subdivision
(c) to such minor and/or parent as the case may be,
.providing an opportunity to be heard before the
legislative body of such entity or hearing officer
appointed by it.
B. Any fine or restitution ordered pursuant to this
section shall be irrespective of and cumulative to any
criminal conviction for an act of graffit~, or any
final adjudication by a Juvenile court, or placement on
~ a supervised program by a probation officer under the
provisions of the Welfare and Institutions Code for
such act. Provided further, that i.n no event may the
combined sum of restttut].on and any fine ordered to be
paid pursuant to an ordinance passed in accordance with
this section exceed the amount of the a6tual costs as
determined by the local public entity to remove, cover
or repair the graffiti by more than $1,000.00.
Any administrative order made pursuant to an ordinance
adopted pursuant to this section shall have the same
force and effect for enforcement and collection
purposes as an order or Judgment of the Superior Court
of the State of California. )n addition, the ordinance
may provide for the co]]ectlon of such sum by the
creation of a lien on any parcel of property owned by
the minor or the parents or parent having custody and
control of the minor as set forth in subdivision (c).
C. An ordinance creating the lien'authorized by
subdivision (b) shall r~qu~re at least ten (10) days
notice prior to the recordation of the lien to the
owner of record of the parcel of land. The notice
shall be served in the sam~ manner as susans in
civil action in accordance with Article 3 (commencing
with section 415.10) of Chapter 4 of T~tle V of Part 2
~ of the Code of Ct. vtl Procedure. If the owner of
FROM MODESTO CITY MCR 04. 11. 1994 04:19 p.
record, after a diligent ~earch cannot be found, the
notice may be served by posting a copy thereof in a
conspicuous place upon the property for a period of ten
(10) days and publication thereof in a newspaper of
general circulation published in the county in which
the property is located pursuant to Section 6062.
(1) A lien authorized by this section shall be
recorded in the county recorder'e off,ce ~n
the county in which the parcel of land is
located and from the date of recording shall
have the force, effect, and priority of a
Judgment lien. The lien author/zed by this
section shall specify the amount of the lien,
the name of the agency on whose behalf the
lien is imposed, the date of the
administrative order referred to in
subdivision (b), the street address, legal
description and assessor's parcel no. of the
parcel on which the lien is imposed, and the
name and address of the recorded owner of the
parcel.
(2) In the event that the lien is discharged,
released, or satisfied, either through
payment or through foreclosure, notice of the
discharge containing the information
specified in subdivision (c) shall be
recorded by the governmental agency. The
lien authorized by this section and the
release of the lien sheik be indexed in the
grantor-grantee index.
(3) The lien authorized by this section may be
collsc%ed in the manner provided by Sections
39581 and 39583 of the Government Code.
MEMORANDUM
March 31, 1994
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: JUDY K. SKOUSEN, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY
Pursuant to prior directive of the City Council~ the City
Attorney's Office has assisted the complainants in their
challenge to the decision of Pacific Gas & Electric Company to
locate the 115 KV transmission lines adjacent to and behind the
southwest Bakersfield community of Campus Park.
As the Council may recall, PG&E asserts that the internal
policies and orders of the Public Utilities Commission exempt
them in this case from compliance with the safeguards afforded to
the community under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Specifically, PG&E contends that PUC General Order 131-C
exempts all transmission lines which are not in excess of 200 KV
from compliance with CEQA. This exemption, if upheld, would
affect all areas of the City as any transmission line under 200
KY, regardless of its location, would be considered exempt from
compliance with CEQA.
The assistance rendered from this office was previously
authorized up to and including the hearing before the
Administrative Law Judge in May 1993 to rule on the issues of
siting (the City of Bakersfield Planning Department participated
in the selection of the route ultimately selected, although had
no authority to prohibit or veto the suggested routes), CEQA
compliance, land use mitigation measures, soil liquefaction
concerns, vehicle and train accidents in the vicinity of the
power lines, adverse effects on property values an~ the harmful
effects of electro-magnetic fields (EMF's). Assistance rendered
from this office included research, preparation of exhibits and
testimony, and counsel as to procedural issues and strategy.
The Administrative Law Judge ruling was adverse to the
complainants, and an appeal was taken from the denial of their
complaint. In 'January 1994, the denial of the complaint by the
ALJ was affirmed by the Public Utilities C~,u~ission of the State'
of California. The complainants have undertaken a request for
reconsideration of the Public Utilities Commission ruling, and
anticipate proceeding with a writ of mandate and/or writ of
certiorari in the event the Public Utilities Commission fails to'
reverse their earlier decision.
THIS MEMORANDUM IS EXEMPT FR~DIS~ANDISI~OTHCTED
BY THEATTOltNEY-CLIENTAKDA~WC~tK-~PRIVI~'~.
Memorandum to Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
Re: Marzolf vs. PG&E
March 31, 1994
Page 2
This report is intended not only as an update as to the
status of this litigation, but also as a request for further
directive from the Council as to whether the City Attorney's
Office may continue to assist the complainants in this endeavor.
JKS:MGA:~