Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/2005 BAKE R S FIELD Zack Scrivner, Chair Sue Benham David Couch Staff: Alan Christensen SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Wednesday, September 7, 2005 4:30 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room Second Floor - City Hall, Suite 201 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2, ADOPT AUGUST 29, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. NEW BUSINESS A.Committee recommendation on City voting delegate and alternate to the League of California Cities Annual Conference - Christensen B.Review and Committee voting recommendation on the League of California Cities' annual resolutions - Christensen 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 6. ADJOURNMENT S:~,C~05 Legislative&Litigation~.L 05 sep 07 agenda.doc DRAFT B A K E R S F I E L D St Christensen Sue Benham For: Alan Tandy, City Manager David Couch AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMI'n'EE MEETING Monday, August 29, 2005 1:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room, Suite 201 Second Floor - City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 1. ROLL CALL Called to Order at 1:05 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Zack Scrivner, Chair; Sue Benham; David Couch 2. ADOPT JUNE 13, 2005 AGrENDA SUMMARY REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Review and Committee recommendation on City Annexation Policy Assistant City Manager Alan Christensen explained this issue was referred to the Committee by Councilmember Couch to review the policy and streamline the process due to changes in LAFCO regulations and redundancies in the policy. The last residential annexation took almost two years. A copy of a draft resolution, draft policy and hearing notice with proposed changes in red and lined-out verbiage proposed to be deleted was included in the Committee packet. Assistant City Manager Alan Christensen gave a review of each proposed change line-by-line. Committee Member Couch requested additional changes to the draft annexation pre-application process. Barbara Fowler spoke and made additional suggestions. · DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Monday, August 29, 2005 Page 2 Barbara Fields spoke regarding the annexation response postcards and the need for notification. Becky Kaiser spoke regarding the annexation process. City Attorney Ginny Gennaro explained that the change to State Law now places all of the rules and regulations regarding annexation under LAFCO. So, whatever the City decides to do with its policy is over and above the requirements of State Law. Committee Member Couch further explained the changes being suggested are to take out repetitive actions and areas where LAFCO has the legal authority, such as the public hearing. Committee Member Benham made a motion the changes requested by the Committee be incorporated into the draft policy by staff and brought back to the Committee for further consideration. The Committee unanimously approved the motion. 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Review and Committee recommendation on Restaurant Letter Grading System City Attorney Gennaro spoke regarding the information in the packet, which included a report from Steve McCalley, Director of County Environmental Health Services Department, to the Board of Supervisors when the Board was considering implementation of a letter "Graded System" for restaurants. The Board of Supervisors ultimately decided not to go forward with a restaurant letter grading system. City Attorney Gennaro explained State Law compels the results of county inspections to be made available to a customer on demand, but does not compel a letter grade for restaurants. State Law permits local jurisdictions to create such grading systems and compel displaying those grades. Inspection of restaurants and enforcement of food safety laws takes place under the jurisdiction of the County of Kern Environmental Health Services Department. The City can implement a letter grading system, but would have to coordinate with the County, because it would be enforced by the County. Committee Member Couch expressed what he had envisioned was to propose to the County to take their current number grading system and equate a letter grade to the number grade. The letter grade could then be posted in the front of the restaurant. 'DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY ~EPORT Monday, August 29, 2005 Page 3 Steve McCalley explained at the present time the County does not use a number grading system. The County uses the Center for Disease Control (CDC) criteria. Focus is on the issues found to be most problematic to cause food illness in people, such as cross-contamination and not keeping food at proper temperatures. The County is in the process, which will take at least a year, of implementing a more comprehensive data management system to allow posting of inspections on the County's website. Los Angeles County has implemented a letter graded system. They have hired approximately 50 health inspectors to increase inspections, so it would be difficult to evaluate which of the two resulted in the increased compliance in Los Angeles. Terry Maxwell, T. L. Maxwell's Restaurant & Bar, spoke in opposition to the letter grading system. Committee Member Couch made a motion to bring this item back to the Committee for further review. The Committee unanimously agreed. B. Review and Committee recommendation on the Fireworks Ordinance Committee Chair Scrivner passed out a one-page sheet with information regarding a house that was burned down near the corner of Derrick and Tomlinson this July 4th by an illegal bottle rocket shot onto the roof. Luckily fire personnel were driving by checking on illegal fireworks and saw the fire and were able to get an unconscious person and one other out of the house. Assistant City Manager Christensen explained the Fireworks item will be on the agenda for the Joint City/County meeting on September 19th. Fire Chief Fraze reported that this July 4th from 7 p.m. to midnight eight enforcement units ran on 181 calls for service. Over 100 pounds of illegal fireworks were confiscated and 18 citations were written. A firefighter was hit in the face singeing his eyelid and burning his gloves by a firework during a response call on illegal fireworks. The Fire Chief expressed the problem of misusing legal fireworks and illegal fireworks will grow unless more stringent measures are taken. Enforcement is difficult as illegal fireworks are being used in conjunction with legal fireworks and when the enforcement units show up the folks switch to legal fireworks to cover up the use of illegal fireworks. An enforcement officer must see or have evidence of the use of illegal fireworks before a citation can be issued. He suggested the following list for the Committee's consideration. · An outright ban of the sale and use of fireworks in the Metropolitan Planning boundary. DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Monday, August 29, 2005 Page 4 · If fireworks are allowed, shorten the number of days fireworks can be sold and used. You can only buy firewOrks during a four-day period, but currently fireworks can be used 365 days of the .year. · Limit the personal use of fireworks to only July 4th. · Increase the dollar amount of the administrative fines.' · In conjunction with fines, use an 'Arrest and Book' procedure for persons caught selling or using illegal or modified fireworks. · Limit the number of fireworks stands to the current number and not add to the number as the population grows. · Increase the fee schedule for the firework stand operators in order to recover the cost of enhanced enforcement efforts. · Increase Fire and Police enforcement efforts. · With the cooperation of the County, any changes made be enforced in the Metropolitan Planning boundary. The air quality on July 4th this year exceeded attainment standards and legally the City of Bakersfield could have been cited. Also, a huge number of animals were lost and hurt, which was a big strain on animal control and the SPCA. The County already bans fireworks in the mountain areas and als° in Tehachapi, so there is framework in place if the City should decide to ban the sale and use of personal fireworks and only allow structured firework shows with'trained personnel. Committee Member Benham expressed comlsassion for the nonprofits and their need to raise funds, but felt there are overwhelming reasons to consider banning fireworks. Roger Jobe, Phantom Fireworks, spoke !n opposition to banning personal use of safe and sane fireworks in Bakersfield. Scott Allen, Phantom Fireworks, spoke regarding using stronger deterrents for modifying fireworks and the use of illegal fireworks. Committee Chair Scrivner requested staff provide updated information on the fees and number of booths; the number of SPCA and animal control calls related to fireworks; and more information on the failure to stay in attainment on air quality and to share the information on animal calls and air quality with the County. The Committee agreed to table this item and bring it back to the Committee for action after the Joint City/County meeting and requested staff to provide the County with the City Clerk's survey. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Monday, August 29, 2005 Page 5 C. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding setting a Committee meeting in September Assistant City Manager Christensen explained before the next scheduled Committee meeting, the Committee's recommendations on the League of. California Cities' resolutions need to go to Council on September 28th in order to forward to the League for the Conference beginning on October 6th. The League will be mailing out the resolution packet to cities this week. The Committee agreed to set meetings on Wednesday, September 7th at 4:30 p.m. and on Wednesday, September 21st at 10:00 a.m. in case more time is required. 6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 3:07 p.m. Staff present: Assistant City Manager Alan Christensen; Assistant City Manager John Stinson; City Attorney Ginny Gennaro; Assistant City Clerk Roberta Gafford; Deputy City Attorney Allen Shaw; Fire Chief Ron Fraze; Deputy Fire Chief Kirk Blair; Deputy Fire Chief Gary Hutton; Director of Fire Prevention Services Ralph Huey; Fire Captain Steve Hollon; City Manager's Office Administrator/Public Relations Coordinator Rhonda Smiley Others present: Kern County Environmental Health Services Director Steve McCalley; Barbara Fowler; Barbara Fields; Becky Kaiser; Roger W. Jobe, Phantom Fireworks; Scott Allen, Phantom Fireworks; Jim Wilson, TNT Fireworks; Terry Maxwell, T. L. Maxwell's Restaurant & Bar; James Burger, The Bakersfield Californian; and Quyen Chung, KGET-TV cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council S:~AC\05 Legislative&Litigatlon~ll 05aug29summary.doc B A K E R S F I E L D OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM August 30, 2005 TO: LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE FROM: ALAN CHRISTENSEN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER ~ SUBJECT: CITY VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE TO LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE Each year the League of California Cities holds an annual conference for which cities are asked to select a Voting Delegate and Alternate. Typically, the Voting Delegate and Alternate are elected leaders who are appointed by the City Council after recommendation by the Legislative and Litigation Committee. This year the League Annual Conference is scheduled for October 6 - 8, 2005 in San Francisco. As resolutions setting League policy direction for the upcoming year are considered during the General Assembly at the Annual Business Meeting, it is especially important for the City to have a Delegate and/or Alternate present. The League's Concluding General Session ! General Assembly will meet on Saturday morning at 10:00 a.m. on October 8th. The estimated start time for the Annual Business Meeting and discussion of resolutions is 10:30 a.m. Recommendations from the Legislative and Litigation Committee will be placed on the City Council's September 28th agenda for approval and will be forwarded to the League for its records after Council determination. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council Alan Tandy, City Manager John W. Stinson, Assistant City Manager Pam McCarthy, City Clerk Rhonda Smiley, Office Administrator/Public Relations S:~AC\05 Legislative&Litigation~vlVotingDelegateandAIternate.doc B A K E R S F I E L D OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM August 30, 2005 TO: LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE FROM: ALAN CHRISTENSEN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REVIEW OF LEAGUE'S ANNUAL RESOLUTIONS The eight proposed resolutions which will be voted on at the League's Annual Conference were received by the City on August 29th. Traditionally, the proposed League resolutions are reviewed by the Legislative and Litigation Committee with recommendation to Council. The Council then determines the City's positions and provides direction to the City's Voting Delegate to vote accordingly. As the City's representative, the Voting Delegate has the authority to forward the Council's agenda as proposed resolutions change during the course of the Annual Conference, in keeping with the Council's historical directive. The League's recommended resolutions are attached for your consideration. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council Alan Tandy, City Manager S:~AC\05 Legislative&Litigation\Cover Memo for League Resolutions.doc t 1400 K STRE£T 602 East Hundngron Dr., St¢. C OF CALl FORN IA S^C~M£NTO, CA 95814 Monrovia, CA 91016 Pm(916) 658-a200 Pm(626) 305-1315 C I T I E S ~'x: (916) 658-8240 ~:x: (626) 305-1345 "~,W~.CACITI ES. O RG August26,2005 Notice of League Annual Meeting and Transmittal of Resolutions Packet To: 1) Mayors and City Managers 2) Members of the League Board of Directors 3) Members of League Policy Committees 4) Members of the League's General Resolutions Committee Meetinq Notice The League of California Cities' 2005 Annual Conference will occur on October 6 - 8 at the Moscone Convention Center West, 800 Howard Street, San Francisco, California. The League's Concluding General Session / General Assembly will meet on Saturday morning at 10:00 a.m., October 8. The estimated start time for the Annual Business Meeting and discussion of resolutions is 10:30 a.m. Conference registration information has been previously sent to each city and is available at www.cacities.orq/ac. Packet Distribution Note to City Managers and City Clerks: Please distribute this packet immediately to the mayor and voting delegate, as well as other city officials planning to attend the conference. If your city needs additional copies, we encourage you to make copies of this packet or print a copy from the League's website (www.cacities.orq/resolutions). Only a limited number of additional copies will be available at the conference. Packet Contents At the conference, seven policy committees, the General Resolutions Committee and the League's General Assembly (comprised of designated voting delegates from each city) will consider the enclosed eight resolutions. This packet contains information relating to the General Assembly's decision-making processes: I. Information and Procedures II. Guidelines for Annual Conference Resolutions III. Location of Meetings IV. Membership of General Resolutions Committee V. History of Resolutions VI. Annual Conference Resolutions (8) We look forward to seeing everyone at the conference. Please Bring This Packet to the Annual Conference October 6 - 8, San Francisco I. INFORMATION AND PROCEDURES RESOLUTIONS CONTAINED IN THIS PACKET. The League bylaws .provide that resolutions shall be referred by the president to an appropriate policy committee for review and recommendation. Resolutions with committee recommendations shall then be referred to the General Resolutions Committee at the Annual Conference. This year, eiqht resolutions have been introduced for consideration by the Annual Conference and referred to the League policy committees. Please note that some resolutions have been referred to more than one policy committee for consideration. POLICY COMMITTEES. Seven policy committees will meet at the Annual Conference. With the exception of the Community Services Policy Committee (which has no resolution assigned to it), all Other policy committees will meet on Thursday, October 6. The committees that met on Thursdays will meet from 8:30'a.m. - 9:15 a.m. The committees that met on Fridays, will meet from 9:30 a.m. - 10:15 a.m. The sponsors of the resolutions were notified of the time and location of the meeting. Please see page iii for the meeting schedule. After resolutions are reviewed, recommendations will 'be made to the General Resolutions Committee. THE GENERAL RESOLUTIONS COMMI'I-I'EE will meet at 1:30 p.m., on Friday, October 7, at the Moscone Convention Center West, San Francisco, to consider the reports of the seven policy committees regarding the eight resolutions. This committee includes one representative from each of the League's regional divisions, functional departments, and standing policy committees, as well as additional city officials appointed by the League president. THE CONCLUDING GENERAL SESSION I GENERAL ASSEMBLY will convene at 10:00 a.m. on Saturday, October 8, at the Moscone Convention Center West. The estimated start time of the Annual Business Meetinq, to consider the report of the General Resolutions Committee, is 10:30 a.m. Resolutions considered by the General Assembly will retain the numbers assigned to them in this document. INITIATIVE RESOLUTIONS. For those issues that develop after the normal 60-day deadline, a resolution may be introduced with a petition signed by designated voting delegates of 10 percent of all member cities (48 valid signatures required) and presented to the Voting Delegates Desk no later than 24 hours prior to the time set for convening the Annual Business Session of the General Assembly. This year, the deadline is 10:30 a.m., Friday, October 7. If the parliamentarian finds that a petitioned resolution is substantially similar in substance to a resolution already under consideration, the petitioned resolution will be 'disqualified. Resolutions can be viewed on the League's website: www. cacities.orq/resolutions. Any questions concerning the resolutions procedure should be directed to Linda Welch Hicks at the League office: Ihicks~,cacities.orq or (916) 658-8224. Pat Eklund, President League of California Cities Council Member, Novato II. GUIDELINES FOR ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTIONS Policy development is a vital and ongoing process within the League. The principal means for deciding policy on the important issues facing cities and the League is through the standing policy committees and the board of directors. The process allows for timely consideration of issues in a changing environment and assures city officials the opportunity to both initiate and influence policy decisions. This influence may be exercised directly through participation as a policy.committee member or as a city official visiting a committee meeting to advance a position on an issue under the committee's purview. If committee membership or personal attendance is not feasible, city officials may affect policy decisions indirectly through department or division representatives on the policy committees or the board of directors. Annual conference resolutions constitute an additional process for developing League policies. It is recommended that resolutions adhere to the following criteria. Guidelines for Annual Conference Resolutions 1. Only issues that have a direct bearing on municipal affairs should be considered or adopted at the Annual Conference. 2. The issue is not of a purely local or regional concern. 3. The recommended policy should not simply restate existing League policy. 4. The resolution should be directed at achieving one of the following objectives: (a) Focus public or media attention on an issue of major importance to cities. (b) Establish a new direction for League policy by establishing general principals around which more detailed policies may be developed by policy committees and the Board of Directors. (c) Consider important issues not adequately addressed by the policy committees and Board of Directors. (d) Amend the League bylaws. III. LOCATION OF MEETINGS Policy Committee Meetings Thursday, October 6, 2005 Moscone Convention Center West 800 Howard Street (4th & Howard St) San Francisco, California 94103 (415) 974-4000 8:30 a.m. - 9:15 a.m. 9:30 a.m. - 10:15 a.m. Employee Relations Administrative Services Housing, Community & Economic Environmental Quality Development Public Safety Revenue and Taxation (Note: Community Services will not meet Transportation, Communication & as no resolutions were referred to Public Works this committee.) General Resolutions Committee Friday, October 7, 2005, 1:30 p.m. Moscone Convention Center West 800 Howard Street, San Francisco General Assembly at the Annual Business Meeting Saturday, October 8, 2005, 10 a.m. Concluding General Session begins at 10 a.m. * Estimated start time for Business Meeting and discussion of resolutions is 10:30 a.m. Moscone Convention Center West - 800 Howard Street, San Francisco iii IV. League of California Cities 2005 GENERAL RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE Annual Conference - San Francisco Moscone Convention Center West - October 6 - 8, 2005 (Committee Meeting: October 7, 2005, 1:30 p.m.) Chair: Maria Alegria, Council Member, Pinole Vice Chair: Larry Clark, Mayor, Rancho Palos Verdes Parliamentarian: Aden Gregorio, Mediator, San Francisco - Cynthia Adams, Council Member, Aliso Viejo Linn Livingston, HR Director, San Bernardino Harry Armstrong, Council Member, Clovis Robert Locke, Finance & Admin. Svcs. Dir., Mt. View Lou Bone, Mayor, Tustin Robin Lowe, Vice Mayor, Hemet Bill Brown, Chief of Police, Lompoc Paul Luellig, Mayor Pro Tem, Barstow Jim Bruno, Council Member, Westlake Village Marsha McLean, Council Member, Santa Clarita John Chlebnik, Council Member, Calimesa Lisa Rapp, Public Works Director, Lakewood Jeff Clet, Fire Chief, San Jose Michael Roushl City Attorney, Pieasanton JoAnne Cousino, City Clerk, Barstow Robert Rumfelt, Mayor, Lakeport lya Falcone, Council Member, Santa Barbara Sedalia Sanders, Council Member, El Centro Joe Fernekes, Mayor Pro Tem, So. San Francisco .Arne Simonsen, Council Member, Antioch Tony Ferrara, Mayor, Arroyo Grande Bill Spriggs, Council Member, Merced Sharon Fierro, Community Dev. Dir., Campbell Ron Swegles, Vice Mayor, Sunnyvale Alice Fredericks, Council Member, Tiburon Miguel Ucovich, Council Member, Loomis Lois Gaston, Council Member, Duarte Lori Van Arsdale, Council Member, Hemet Curt Hagman, Council Member, Chino Hills Ana Ventura-Phares, Mayor, Watsonville Kathy Hicks, Council Member, Walnut Creek A. Kay Vinson, City Clerk, Murrieta Joe Kellejian, Mayor, Solano Beach Laura Wright, Sr. Administrative Analyst, Pittsburg Jeff Kolin, City Manager, Santa Rosa iv HISTORY OF RESOLUTIONS Resolutions have been grouped by policy committees to which they have been assigned. KEY TO REVIEWING BODIES KEY TO ACTIONS TAKEN 1. Policy Committee A - Approve 2. General Resolutions Committee D - Disapprove 3. General Assembly N - No Action R - Refer to appropriate policy committee for study Action Footnotes a - Amend Aa - Approve as amended * Subject matter covered in another resolution Aaa - Approve with additional amendment(s) ** Existing League policy Ra - Amend and refer as amended to *** Local authority presently exists appropriate policy committee for study Raa - Additional amendments and refer Da - Amend (for clarity or brevity) and Disapprove Na - Amend (for clarity or 1orevity) and take No Action W - Withdrawn by Sponsor Procedural Note: Resolutions that are approved by the General Resolutions Committee, as well as all qualified petitioned resolutions, are reported to the floor of the General Assembly. In addition, League policy provides the following procedure for resolutions approved by League policy committees but not approved by the General ResolutiOns Committee. Every resolution initially' recommended for approval and adoption by all the League policy committees to which the resolution is assigned, but subsequently recommended for disapproval, referral or no action by the General Resolutions Committee, shall then be placed on a consent agenda for consideration by the General Assembly. The consent agenda shall include a brief description of the bases for the recommendations by both the policy committee(s) and General Resolutions Committee, as well as the recommended action by each. Any voting delegate may make a motion to pull a resolution from the consent agenda in order to request the opportunity to fully debate the resolution. If, upon a majority vote of the General Assembly, the request for debate is approved, the General Assembly shall have the opportunity to debate and subsequently vote on the resolution. Resolutions have been grouped by policy committees to which they have been assigned. Please note that some resolutions may have been assiqned to more than one committee. These resolutions are noted by this si.qn (-). Number Key Word Index Reviewing Body Action I I I 1 I 2 I 3 I 1 - Policy Committee Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee 2 - General Resolutions Committee 3 - General Assembly ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 Publication of Home Addresses & Telephone Numbers of Elected & Appointed Officials COMMUNITY SERVICES POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 INote No resolutions were assigned to this policy committee. I EMPLOYEE RELATIONS POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 2 Public Sector Mentoring Program I I ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 · 3 Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use · 4 Voluntary Statewide Residential Green Building Guidelines · 5 Urban Environmental Accords Adopted by United Nations World Environmental Day HOUSING, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 · 3 'Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use · 4 Voluntary Statewide Residential Green Building Guidelines · 5 Urban Environmental Accords Adopted by United Nations World Environmental Day vi PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY COMMITTEE .~ I 2 3 Sexual Predators Proposition 172 REVENUE AND TAXATION POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 172 I Proposition I TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION AND PUBLIC WORKS POLICY COMMITTEE 1 2 3 · 5 Urban Environmental Accords Adopted bt United Nations World Environmental Da)/ 8 Broadband Internet Access RESOLUTIONS INITIATED BY PETITION General Resolutions General Committee Assembly Recommendation Action vii VI 2005 ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES POLICY COMMITTEE 1. RESOLUTION RELATING TO PUBLICATION OF HOME ADDRESSES AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS Source: City of Tustin Referred to: Administrative Services Policy Committee Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: WHEREAS, The Public Safety Officials Home Protection Act of 2002 added provisions to GOVemment Code § 6254.21 that prohibit any person from knowingly posting the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official, or the official's residing spouse or child, on the Internet knowing that the person is an elected or appointed official and intending to cause imminent great bodily harm to that individual; and WHEREAS, elected and appointed officials are not protected in a similar manner from publication of their home address or telephone number in a newspaper or similar periodical; and WHEREAS, elected and appointed officials, as defined in § 6254.21, do receive threats and have become the target of violence at their homes, and the unauthorized publication of their home addresses or telephone numbers in newspapers or similar periodicals in ads or articles, like publication on the Internet, is a threat to the security of public officials in their homes; and WHEREAS, Government Code § 6254.21 should be amended or other legislation enacted which prohibits the unauthorized publication of the home addresses or telephone numbers of elected and appointed officials in newspapers or similar periodicals or otherwise provides protection to elected and appointed officials from such unauthorized publication; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of Califomia Cities, assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 8, 2005, that the League support legislation to extend or provide protection to elected and appointed officials from the publication of their home addresses or telephone numbers in newspapers or similar periodicals. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO. 1 SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN TITLE: RESOLUTION RELATING TO PUBLICATION OF HOME ADDRESSES AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS Background: The Public Safety Officials Home Protection Act of 2002 amended State law to prohibit the posting of the name, address or telephone number of any elected official, or the official's residing spouse or child, on the Internet knowing that the person is an elected official and intending to cause imminent bodily harm to that individual. Elected officials are not protected in a similar manner from publication of their home addresses or telephone numbers in a newspaper or similar periodical. Being an elected official carries a responsibility to be accessible to the public. Letters, emails, conducting public hearings, public input at public meetings, voice messages, etc., are means to communicate with elected officials. More than ever, elected officials are subject to public scrutiny and interface with the public through traditional means and with interactive technology. At the same time, citizen legislators should expect reasonable privacy in their homes and be secure in the feeling that their public official status does not endanger themselves or their families. Unfortunately, carrying out their duties as elected officials can give rise to situations where some persons are dissatisfied to the point of inappropriate conduct towards elected officials. Elected officials do at times make decisions regarding regulatory measures, authorize litigation and affect the lives of individuals through discretionary decision making. Discharging these duties does at times upset some individuals. Elected officials should not have to unduly fear for their safety or that of their families when discharging their duties. If this resolution is enacted by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, the League would support legislation to simply extend protection to elected officials that currently exists for the Internet to newspapers and other periodicals. IIIIIIII RESOLUTION REFERRED TO EMPLOYEE RELATIONS POLICY COMMITTEE 2. RESOLUTION RELATING TO PUBLIC SECTOR MENTORING PROGRAM Source: Personnel and Employee Relations Department Referred to: Employee Relations Policy Committee Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: WHEREAS, many public sector employees will retire from service within the next five to ten years; and WHEREAS, the impact of these vacancies due to the loss of qualified staff and institutional knowledge will be particularly evident in critical positions such as department heads, managers, and supervisors; and WHEREAS, the community of public sector employers on whole are faced with serious issues regarding new recruitment and vacancies in critical positions in local government; and WHEREAS, the community of public sector employers are faced with the absence of a comprehensive, statewide, succession-planning strategy; and WHEREAS, the lack of succession planning impacts all city departmedts of local governing agencies from public safety to miscellaneous employees; and WHEREAS, one of the most efficient strategies to develop internal talent pools to fill critical vacancies within a local government agency is a comprehensive Mentoring Program; and WHEREAS, the Personnel and Employee Relations Department of the League of California Cities has developed a model Mentoring Program from which public agencies may benefit; and WHEREAS, all Departments of the League of California Cities will benefit from a Mentoring Program that addresses succession planning and staff development issues; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October. 8, 2005, that the League support a statewide Mentoring Program that can be accessed via the League's website; and be it further RESOLVED, that the League support all local government succession planning and mentoring efforts, encourage each League Department to actively discuss and encourage such efforts, encourage each public agency to establish succession plans and mentoring programs, and to use the Personnel and Employee Relations Department Mentoring Program as a model. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO, 2 SOURCE: PERSONNEL AND EMPLOYEE RELATIONS DEPARTMENT TITLE: RESOLUTION RELATING TO PUBLIC SECTOR MENTORING PROGRAM. Background: This resolution is the result of the Personnel and Employee Relations Department's ongoing efforts to establish a comprehensive, statewide mentoring program. The objective of the Mentorship program is to establish a database of qualified Human Resources professionals, and other professionals from all areas of public service, to provide guidance and career counseling for individuals seeking to advance their public sector professions. The Mentoring Program seeks trained professionals with sufficient qualifications to become Mentors, and who are willing to advise others seeking car career advancement in the public sector. The Mentoring Program would also seek to pair the Mentors with individuals needing professional guidance on advancing their careers in the public sector. Qualified individuals would be listed in a database, which would be available through the League of California Cities Website. Individuals seeking to advance and/or develop further as a public sector professional would be linked to qualified Mentors approved by the Employee Relations Department's Executive Board. The Employee Relations Executive Board Officers are anticipating a large number of public sector professionals to retire in the next 5 to 10 years, and public agencies do not have a sufficiently qualified pool of candidates to fill the expected vacancies. Through a comprehensive Mentoring Program, future professionals in all areas of public service would have a resource to ' assist in their career development; public agencies would have a resource that assists them in creating future leaders to fill critical and important positions. The expected results of this program are the following: · A sharing of public institutional knowledge that transcends a variety of fields in public sector. · Development of the next wave of professionals and managers in the public sector. 3 · Increase in the quality of professionals in the public sector to address the workforce that will be retiring in the next 5 to 10 years. The Personnel and Employee Relations Department has sponsored a resolution to call attention to the mentoring program and necessity for succession planning efforts in each public agency in the State. The League has and will continue to fight funding issues on the part of public agencies. The lack of qualified leaders and staff is just as critical. The Employee Relations Department strongly urges the League of California Cities to support the Mentoring Program and to actively encourage each public agency to support and engage in mentoring and succession planning efforts. II/11111 RESOLUTION REFERRED-TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICY COMMITTEE · 3. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE AHWAHNEE WATER PRINCIPLES 'FOR RESOURCErEFFICIENT LAND USE Source: Jake Mackenzie, Mayor, Rohnert Park Referred to: Environmental Quality and Housing, Community & Economic Development Policy Committees Recommendation to. General Resolutions Committee: - Environmental Quality Policy Committee: - Housing, Community & Economic Development Policy Committee: WHEREAS, cities are facing major challenges with water contamination, storm water runoff, flood damage liability, and concerns about whether there will be enough reliable water :..: for current residents as well as for new development, issues that impact city budgets and taxpayers; and WHEREAS, land use decisions made at the local level have major impacts on local, regional, and state water resources in terms of quality, quantity, and availability; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Commission, in partnership with the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties, sought funding from the State Water Resources Control Board to develop principles related to water-efficiency and land use; and W. HEREAS, the Local Government Commission developed a set of principles known as the 'Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use which address the disconnect between local land use decisions and water resources, and which complement the earlier Ahwahnee Principles for Resource-Efficient Communities; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 8, 2005, that the League encourage its member cities to adopt the Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use and to implement the Principles in their future land use decisions. Attachment: Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use 4 The Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use Preamble Cities and counties are facing major challenges with water contamination, storm water runoff, flood damage liability, and concerns about whether there will be enough reliable water for current residents as well as for new development. These issues impact city and county budgets and taxpayers. Fortunately there are a number'of stewardship actions that cities and counties can take that reduce costs and improve the reliability and quality of our water resources. The Water Principles below complement the Ahwahnee Principles for Resource-Efficient Communities that were developed in 1991. Many cities and counties are already using them to improve the vitality and prosperity of their communities. Community Principles 1. Community design should be compact, mixed use, walkable and transit-oriented so that automobile-generated urban runoff pollutants are minimized and the open lands that absorb water are preserved to the maximum extent possible. (See the Ahwahnee Principles for Resource-Efficient Communities) 2. Natural resources such as wetlands, flood plains, recharge zones, riparian areas, open space, and native habitats should be identified, preserved and restored as valued assets for flOod protection, water quality improvement, groundwater recharge, habitat, and overall long-term water resource sustainability. 3. Water holding areas such as creek beds, recessed athletic fields, ponds, cisterns, and other features that serve to recharge groundwater, reduce runoff, improve water quality and decrease flooding should be incorporated into the urban landscape. 4. All aspects of landscaping from the selection of plants to soil preparation and the installation of irrigation systems should be designed to reduce water demand, retain · runoff, decrease flooding, and recharge groundwater. 5. Permeable surfaces should be used for hardscape. Impervious surfaces such as driveways, streets, and parking lots should be minimized so that land is available to absorb storm water, reduce polluted urban runoff, recharge groundwater and reduce flooding. 6. Dual plumbing that allows grey water from showers, sinks and washers to be reused for landscape irrigation should be included in the infrastructure of new development. 7. Community design should maximize the use of recycled water for appropriate applications including outdoor irrigation, toilet flushing, and commercial and industrial processes. Purple pipe should be installed in all new construction and remodeled buildings in anticipation of the future availability of recycled water. 8. Urban water conservation technologies such as Iow-flow toilets, efficient clothes washers, and more efficient water-using industrial equipment should be incorporated in all new construction and retrofitted in remodeled buildings. 5 9. Ground water treatment and brackish water desalination should be pursued when necessary to maximize locally available, drought-proof water supplies. Implementation Principles 1. Water supply agencies should be consulted early in the land use deCision-making process regarding technology, demographics and growth projections. 2. City and county officials, the watershed council, LAFCO, special districts and other stakeholders sharing watersheds should collaborate to take advantage of the benefits and synergies of water resource planning at a watershed level. 3. The best, multi-benefit and integrated strategies and projects should be identified and implemented before less integrated proposals, unless urgency demands otherwise. 4. From start to finish, projects and programs should involve the public, build relationships, and increase the sharing of and access to information. 5. Plans, programs, projects and policies should be monitored and evaluated to determine if the expected results are achieved and to improve future practices. Authors: Celeste Cantu Martha Davis Jennifer Hosterman Susan Lien Longville Jake Mackenzie Jonas Minton Mary Nichols Virginia Porter Al Wanger Robert Wilkinson Kevin Wolf Editor: Judy Corbett For more information, contact the LGC Center for Livable Communities: 916-448-1198, ext 321 © Copyright 2005, Local Government Commission, Sacramento CA 95814 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO. 3 SOURCE: JAKE MACKENZIE, MAYOR, ROHNERT PARK TITLE: RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE AHWAHNEE WATER PRINCIPLES FOR RESOURCE-EFFICIENT LAND USE Background: The Local Government Commission, in partnership with the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties, sought funding from the State Water Resources Control Board to develop principles related to water-efficiency and land use. The Local Government Commission developed a set of principles known as the Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use which address the disconnect between local land use decisions and water resources, and which complement the earlier Ahwahnee Principles for Resource-Efficient Communities The Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use provide cities with a framework to reduce the impact that their growth decisions can have on the quality and quantity of their water resources. Maintaining adequate water supplies and water quality, and protecting the beneficial uses of water, depends largely on land use decisions made by local government. Land use choices either cause or avoid physical impacts to aquatic, wetland, riparian habitat and habitat connectivity, construction and post-construction urban pollution, and alteration of flow regimes and groundwater recharge. The distribution of impervious surfaces and design of storm drain collector systems also have both immediate and long-term impacts on aquatic resources watershed-wide. All in all, the current disconnect between water supplies and quality and land-use regulation has resulted in chronic permitting conflicts, costly regulatory delays, and inadequate resource protection. After-the-fact regulatory control is at best a partial substitute for resource- sensitive planning that assures the efficient use of water and avoids environmental degradation. To make matters worse, political jurisdictions rarely correspond to physical watersheds, and cross-jurisdictional coordinatiOn and cooPeration is rare or nonexistent. The relationship between land use and water will become increasingly critical given California's projected population'growth and urbanization. The Local Government Commission believes that it is extremely important to inform local elected officials about their critical role in addressing future water supplies and the protection of other beneficial uses. For these reasons, we encourage the League of California Cities to adopt this resolution endorsing the Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use, and support adoption of the Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource-Efficient Land Use by its member cities, and implementation of the Principles in their future land use decisions. In 2003, local elected officials from throughout the state indicated interest in the principles and support for the proposal to the SWRCB, including: Aliso Viejo Councilmember Karl Warkomski Rohnert Park Councilmember Jake Mackenzie Buena Park Councilmember Art Brown St. Helena Mayor Ken Slavens Buenaventura Councilmember Nell Andrews San Bernardino Councilmember Susan Lien Longville Carlsbad Mayor Ramona Finnila San Jose Councilmember Linda LeZotte Cloverdale Councilmember Robert Jehn San Luis Obispo Councilmember Christine Mulholland Davis Councilmember Michael Harrington San Luis Obispo County Supervisor Shirley Bianchi Imperial Beach Councilmember Patricia McCoy Santa Clara Councilmember John McLemore Irvine Councilmember Beth Krom Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom Loomis Councilmember Walt Scherer Santa Rosa Vice Mayor Jane Bender Los Angeles Councilmember Ruth Galanter Sonoma Councilmember Larry Barnett Modesto Mayor Carmen Sabatino South Gate Mayor Hector De La Torre Monterey County Supervisor Edith Johnsen Stanislaus County Supervisor Pat Paul Napa County Supervisor Diane Dillon Tehama County Supervisor Barbara Mclver Pinole Councilmember Maria Alegria Ukiah Councilmember Marl Rodin Placer County Supervisor Harriet White Ventura County Supervisor Kathy Long Pleasanton Councilmember Jennifer Hosterman Watsonville Mayor Richard de la Paz Redwood City Mayor Richard Claire Woodside Councilmember David Tanner Richmond Vice Mayor Tom Butt Visalia Mayor Jesus Gamboa Rolling Hills Estates Councilmember John Addleman Metropolitan Water District Boardmember Judy Abdo IIIIIIII 7 ,4. RESOLUTION RELATING TO VOLUNTARY STATEWIDE RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING GUIDELINES Source: Easy Bay Division Referred to: Environmental Quality Policy Committee and Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: - Environmental Quality Policy Committee: - Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committee: WHEREAS, California cities strive to preserve and improve the natural and built environment of communities in California, protecting the health of their residents and visitors while fostering their economy; and WHEREAS, the "green building" concept is a whole systems approach to the design, construction and operation of buildings that employs materials and methods that promote natural resource conservation, energy and water efficiency and good indoor air quality; and WHEREAS, green buildings benefit building industry professionals, residents and communities by improving construction quality, increasing building durability, reducing utility, maintenance, water and energy costs, creating healthier homes and enhancing comfort and livability; and WHEREAS, in recent years, green building design, construction, and operational techniques have become increasingly widespread in California and the nation, with many .' homeowners, businesses, and building professionals voluntarily seeking to incorporate green building techniques into their projects; and WHEREAS, the Alameda County Waste Management Authority had developed a series of voluntary Green Building Guidelines designed specifically for the residential building industry (New Home Construction, Home Remodeling, Multifamily; and WHEREAS, the practices contained in these residential Green Building Guidelines were selected for their viability in today's market and their ability to 'promote sustainable buildings and communities; and WHEREAS, a number of cities and counties throughout California have used these guidelines and; WHEREAS, to provide regional and statewide consistency, the State Green Residential Environmental Action Team (GREAT) under the leadership of the California Integrated Waste Management Board (ClWMB) is developing voluntary, statewide Residential Green Building Guidelines based on Alameda County's guidelines; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 8, 2005, that the League support the voluntary inclusion of green building design and strategies in residential public and private development projects; and be it further 8 RESOLVED, that the League endorse voluntary, statewide Residential Green Building Guidelines as developed by GREAT and CIWMB; and be it further RESOLVED, that the League encourage cities to adopt the statewide residential guidelines as a reference guide and explore incentives to encourage their use .by private developers of residential construction projects. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO. 4 SOURCE: EAST BAY DIVISION TITLE: RESOLUTION RELATING TO VOLUNTARY STATEWIDE RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING GUIDELINES Background: In order to meet expected California population growth, approximately 220,000 housing units will need to be added annually until 2020. According to the State of California this growth and housing development will have significant impacts in terms of energy consumption, waste generation, water use, transportation, and other quality of life factors. An effective way to reduce these impacts is by incorporating green building in projects. Green building is one of the fastest growing trends in the building industry, according to Better Homes & Gardens magazine. Interest in green building spans the public, private and nonprofit sectors. Local governments in California, such as City of Santa Monica and the Alameda County Waste Management Authority, have developed green building guidelines and educational programs. The California Building Industry Association created the California Green Builder program, and the National Association of Homebuilders released guidelines this year. The U.S. Green Building Council developed the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system, which is being used for institutional and commercial buildings nationally. The State of California is leading by example by requiring all State buildings to be constructed to a LEED Silver standard (Governor's Executive Order #S-20-04) and by promoting the Collaborative for High Performance Schools. What is green building? In a nutshell, green building means taking steps to create buildings that are safe and healthy for people and that protect our environment. For example, proper orientation of homes on a site can significantly reduce the heating and cooling energy that is required year after year. Recycled-content decking, reclaimed lumber and other products put waste to good use, while providing quality and durability that often exceed conventional materials. Advanced framing techniques can substantially reduce lumber requirements without compromising structural integrity. Using Iow-emitting interior finishes and designing for sufficient ventilation will contribute to better indoor air quality. While specific methods and products may vary from project to project, the basic principles of green building apply to all types of new construction and renovation, from remodeling a kitchen to constructing a courthouse. What are the benefits of green building? Green building promotes a whole-systems approach to the planning, design, construction and operation of buildings. This comprehensive approach benefits communities, residents and businesses by: 9 · Improving construction quality and increasing building longevity · Reducing utility, maintenance and infrastructure costs · Protecting the health of workers and residents · Enhancing quality of life in our communities · Supporting manufacturers and suppliers of resource-efficient building products What are Residential Green Building Guidelines? Residential Green Building Guidelines educate builders, homeowners and municipalities about cost-effective green building practices that are applicable to home construction methods in California. The Guidelines were first developed through a collaborative partnership among builders, green building experts and government staff in Alameda County.. The New Home Construction Guidelines are being revised to be applicable throughout California and compatible with all available third party verification programs. An interagency state task force led by the California Integrated Waste Management Board, including the California Air Resources Board, California Energy Commission, and Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, is providing technical guidance. Numerous local governments have also contributed t° its development. Why the need for Residential Guidelines? Residential Guidelines will facilitate sustainable home construction practices by: · Providing local governments with a ready-to-use educational tool · Offering a range of green homebuilding practices from simple to sophisticated · Encouraging statewide consistency to increase predictability for builders ~. · Providing a way for builders to differentiate themselves in the marketplace EAST BAY DIVISION ACTION At their Board of Directors meeting on June 16, 2005, the East Bay Division unanimously approved the attached Resolution supporting the Voluntary Statewide Residential Green Building Guidelines RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Environmental Quality Policy Committee recommend to the General Resolutions Committee adoption of the Voluntary Statewide Residential Green Building Guidelines Resolution: · Supporting the inclusion of green building design and strategies in public and private development projects · Encouraging the California Integrated Waste Management Board to take a leadership role in providing model statewide residential guidelines · Encouraging cities in California to adopt voluntary residential guidelines, evaluate available third party verification programs, and explore incentives to encourage green building by private developers of residential construction projects //////// 10 e5. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACCORDS ADOPTED AT UNITED NATIONS WORLD ENVIRONMENT DAY Source: Gavin Newsom, Mayor, San Francisco Referred to: Environmental Quality; Housing, Community and Economic Development; and Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: - Environmental Quality Policy Committee: - Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committee: - Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committee: WHEREAS, for the first time in history, the majority of the planet's population now live in cities and that continued urbanization will result in one million people moving to cities each week, thus creating a new set of environmental challenges and opportunities; and WHEREAS, mayors of cities around the globe have a unique opportunity to provide leadership to develop truly sustainable urban centers based on culturally and economically appropriate local actions; and- WHEREAS, 'the Urban Environmental Accords, which were developed as part of United Nations World Environment Day 2005 and signed in San Francisco on June 5, 2005, comprise 21 actions to provide first steps toward urban environmental sustainability, in topic areas of energy, waste reduction, urban design, urban nature, transportation, environmental health, and water; and WHEREAS, in the spirit of the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment, the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, the 1996 Istanbul Conference on Human Settlements, the 2000 Millennium Development Goals, and the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, the Urban Environmental Accords build on the synergistic extension of efforts to advance sustainability, foster vibrant economies, promote social equity, and protect the planet's natural systems; and WHEREAS, over seventy cities from six continents have already adopted the Urban Environmental Accords, coming together to write a new chapter in the history of global cooperation to promote this collective platform and to build an ecologically sustainable, economically dynamic, and socially equitable future for our urban cities; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 8, 2005, that the League calls to action all California mayors to sign the Urban Environmental Accords and collaborate with us to implement the Accords; and be it further RESOLVED, that by signing the Urban Environmental Accords we commit to encourage our city governments to adopt these Accords and commit our best efforts to achieve the Actions stated within; and be it further RESOLVED, that by implementing the Urban Environmental Accords, we aim to realize the right to a clean, healthy, and safe environment for all members of our society. Attachment: Urban Environmental Accords 11 ~ URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACCORDS Signed on the occasion of United Nations Environmental Programme World Environmental Day June 5, 2005, in San Francisco, California Green Cities Declaration Recognizing that for the first time in history, the majority of the planet's population now lives in cities and that continued urbanization will result in one million people moving to cities each week, thus creating a new set of environmental challenges and opportunities; and Believing that as Mayors of cities around the globe, we have a unique opportunity to provide leadership to develop truly sustainable urban centers based on culturally and economically appropriate local actions; and Recalling that in 1945 the leaders of 50 nations gathered in San Francisco to develop and sign the Charter of~the United Nations; and Acknowledging the importance of the obligations and spirit of the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment, the 1992 Rio Earth Summit (UNCED), the 1996 Istanbul Conference on Human Settlements, the 2000 Millennium Summit, and the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, we see the Urban Environmental Accords described below as a synergistic extension of the efforts to advance sustainability, foster vibrant economies, promote social equity, and protect the planet's natural systems; Therefore, be it resolved, today on World Environment Day 2005 in San Francisco, we the signatory Mayors have come together to write a new chapter in the history of global cooperation. We commit to promote this collaborative platform and to build an ecologically sustainable, economically. dynamic, and socially equitable future for our urban citizens; and Be it further resolved that we call to action our fellow Mayors around the world to sign the Urban Environmental Accords and collaborate with us to implement the Accords; and Be it further resolved that by signing these. Urban Environmental Accords, we commit to encourage our City governments to adopt these Accords and commit our best efforts to achieve the Actions stated within. By implementing the Urban Environmental Accords, we aim to realize the right to a clean, healthy, and safe environment for all members of our society. Implementation & Recognition The 21 Actions that comprise the Urban Environmental Accords are proven first steps toward environmental sustainability. However, to achieve long-term sustainability, cities will have to progressively improve, performance in all thematic areas. Implementing the Urban Environmental Accords will require an open, transparent, and participatory dialogue between government, community groups, businesses, academic institutions, and other key partners. Accords implementation will benefit where decisions are made on the basis of a careful assessment of available alternatives using the best available science. The call to action set forth in the Accords will most often result in cost savings as a result of diminished resource consumption and improvements in the health and general well-being of city residents. Implementation of the Accords can leverage each city's purchasing power to promote and even require responsible environmental, labor and human rights practices from vendors. 12 Between now and the World Environment Day 2012, cities shall work to implement as many of the 21 Actions as possible. The ability of cities to enact local environmental laws and policies differs greatly. However, the success of the Accords will ultimately be judged on the basis of actions taken. Therefore, the Accords can be implemented though programs and activities even where cities lack the requisite legislative authority to adopt laws. The goal is for cities to pick three actions to adopt each year. In order to recognize the progress of cities to implement the Accords a City Green Star Program shall be created. At the end of the seven years a city that has implemented: 19 - 21 Actions shall be recognized as a -kW-kW City 15 - 18 Actions shall be recognized as a -k-k-k City 12 - 17 Actions shall be recognized as a -k-k City 8 - 11 Actions shall be recognized as a -k City Energy Renewable Energy. Energy Efficiency. Climate Change Waste Reduction Zero Waste · Manufacturer Responsibility. Consumer Responsibility Urban Design Green Building · Urban Planning · Slums Urban Nature Parks · Habitat Restoration · Wildlife Transportation Public Transportation · Clean Vehicles .Reducing Congestion Environmental Health Toxics Reduction · Healthy Food Systems · Clean Air Water Water Access and Efficiency. Source Water Protection. Waste Water Reduction Energy Action I Adopt and implement a policy to increase the use of renewable energy to meet ten per cent of the city's peak electric load within seven years. Action 2 Adopt and implement a policy to reduce the city's peak electric load by ten per cent within seven years through energy efficiency, shifting the timing of energy demands, and conservation measures. Action 3 Adopt a citywide greenhouse gas reduction plan that reduces the jurisdiction's emissions by twenty-five per cent by 2030, and which includes a system for accounting and auditing greenhouse gas emissions. Waste Reduction Action 4 Establish a policy to achieve zero waste going to landfills and incinerators by 2040. Action 5 Adopt a citywide program that reduces the use of a disposable, toxic, or non-renewable product category by at least fifty per cent in seven years. Action 6 Implement "user-friendly" recycling and composting programs, with the goal of reducing by twenty per cent per capita solid waste disposal to landfill and incineration in seven years. 13 Urban Design Action 7 Adopt a policy that mandates a green building rating system standard that applies to all new municipal buildings. Action 8 Adopt urban planning principles and practices that advance higher density, mixed use, walkable, bikeable, and disabled-accessible neighborhoods which coordinate land use and transportation with open space systems for recreation and ecological restoration. Action 9 Adopt a policy or implement a program that Creates environmentally beneficial jobs in slums and/or Iow-income neighborhoods. Urban Nature Action 10 Ensure that there is an accessible public park or recreational open space within half-a- kilometer of every city resident by 2015. Action 11 Conduct an inventory of existing canopy coverage in the city and then establish a goal based on ecological and community considerations to plant or maintain canopy coverage in not less than 50 per cent of all available sidewalk planting sites. Action 12 Pass legislation that protects critical habitat corridors and other key habitat characteristics (e.g. water features, food-bearing plants, shelter for wildlife, use of native species, etc.) from unsustainable development. Transportation Action 13 Develop and implement a policy which expands affordable public transportation coverage to within half-a-kilometer of all city residents in ten years. Action 14 Pass a law or implement a program that eliminates leaded gasoline (where it is still used); phases down sulfur levels in diesel and gasoline fuels, concurrent with using advanced emission controls on all buses, taxis, and public fleets to reduce particulate matter and smog- forming emissions from those fleets by 50 per cent in seven years. Action 15 Implement a policy to reduce the percentage of commuter trips by single occupancy vehicles by ten per cent in seven years. Environmental Health Action 16 Every year, identify one product, chemical, or compound that is used within the city that represents the greatest risk to human health and adopt a law and provide incentives to reduce or eliminate its use by the municipal government. Action 17 Promote the public health and environmental benefits of supporting locally grown organic foods. Ensure that twenty per cent of all city facilities (including schools) serve locally grown and organic food within seven years. Action 18 Establish an Air Quality Index (AQI) to measure the level of air pollution and set the goal of reducing by 10 per cent in seven years the number of days categorized in the AQI range as "unhealthy" or "hazardous." Water Action 19 Develop policies to increase adequate access to safe drinking water, aiming at access for all by 2015. For cities with potable water consumption greater than 100 liters per capita per day, adopt and implement policies to reduce consumption by 10 per cent by 2015. 14 Action 20 Protect the ecological integrity of the city's primary drinking water sources (i.e., aquifers, dvers, lakes, wetlands and associated ecosystems). Action 21 Adopt municipal wastewater management guidelines and reduce the volume of untreated wastewater discharges by ten per cent in seven years through the expanded use of recycled water and the implementation of a sustainable urban watershed planning process that includes participants of all affected communities and is based on sound economic, social, and environmental principles. Note: A copy of the original document is available online at: http:llwww.wed2OO5.orql3.1 .php BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO. 5 Not Provided by Sponsor I//////I RESOLUTIONS REFERRED TO HOUSING, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICY COMMITTEE · 3. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE AHWAHNEE WATER PRINCIPLES FOR RESOURCE-EFFICIENT LAND USE Source: Jake Mackenzie, Mayor, Rohnert Park Referred to: Environmental Quality and Housing, Community & Economic .. Development Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: - Environmental Quality Policy Committee: - Housing, Community & Economic Development Policy Committee: NOTE: To see the resolution text and background, please refer to the Environmental Quality section. · 4. RESOLUTION RELATING TO VOLUNTARY STATEWIDE RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING GUIDELINES Source: Easy Bay Division Referred to: Environmental Quality Policy Committee and Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committees Recommendation .to General Resolutions Committee: - Environmental Quality Policy Committee: - Housing, Community and Economic Development PoliCy Committee: NOTE: To see the resolution text and background, please refer to the Environmental Quality section. 15 RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACCORDS ADOPTED AT UNITED NATIONS WORLD ENVIRONMENT DAY Source: Gavin Newsom, Mayor, San Francisco Referred to: Environmental Quality; Housing, Community and Economic Development; and Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: - Environmental Quality Policy Committee: - Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committee: - Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committee: NOTE: To see the resolution text, please refer to the Environmental Quality section. RESOLUTIONS REFERRED TO PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY COMMI'I-I'EE 6. RESOLUTION RELATING TO SEXUAL PREDATORS Source: City of La Mesa Referred to: Public Safety Policy Committee Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: WHEREAS, existing law provides that: (1) minors adjudged wards of the juvenile court may be placed in community care .facilities; and (2) an inmate released on parole for commission of lewd or lascivious acts or continuous sexual abuse of a child shall not be placed or reside (for the duration of the period of parole) within 1/4 mile of a school; and WHEREAS, Senator Hollingsworth introduced SB 1051 with the support of Assemblyman Jay La Suer which would: (1) prohibit a licensed community care facility receiving state funds and located within one mile of any school from accepting juveniles undergoing treatment, therapy, or counseling for sexual disorders, deviancy, or sexual misbehavior of any kind; and (2) expand the 1/4 mile distance restriction to one mile; and WHEREAS, the said exclusion of juveniles from specified licensed community care facilities and the expansion of the distance requirement to one mile is necessary and appropriate to maximize the protection of our communities' youth against potential attacks by sexual predators; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 8, 2005, that the League support SB 1051 for purposes of maximizing the protection of our communities' youth against potential attacks by sexual predators. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO. 6 Not Provided by Sponsor IIIIIIII 16 e7. RESOLUTION RELATING TO PROPOSITION 172 Source: San Diego County Division Referred to: Public Safety and Revenue and Taxation Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: - Public Safety Policy Committee: - Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee: WHEREAS, on November 2, 1993, California voters approved Proposition 172, the Local Public Safety Protection and Improvement Act of 1993 which established a permanent statewide half-cent sales tax for the support of local public safety activities in cities and counties; and WHEREAS, Proposition 172 was placed on the ballot by the Legislature and the Governor to partially replace the $2.6 billion in property taxes shifted from local agencies to local school district's "educational revenue augmentation funds" (ERAF); and WHEREAS, the proceeds of the funds, pursuant to Proposition 172, were to be used by cities and counties to provide necessary funds to "public safety services" including but not limited to sheriffs, police, fire protection, county district attorneys and county corrections; and WHEREAS, cities in San Diego County contribute a disproportionate share of ERAF, and in 1996 Senator Steve Peace introduced SB 8 which caps receipts of Proposition 172 revenues to cities at 5.56%, while the County of San Diego continues to draw 94.35% of these funds even though they do not have a fire agency nor significantly assist other local fire agencies in the unincorporated portions of the county with financial assistance; and WHEREAS, the San Diego County Division of the League of California Cities unanimously endorses an appropriate modification of the distributions of Proposition 172 revenues; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 8, 2005, that the League endorse and support the San Diego County Division's efforts to amend the distribution formula to reflect an equitable distribution of Proposition 172 public safety revenues. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO. 7 SOURCE: SAN DIEGO COUNTY DIVISION TITLE: RESOLUTION RELATING TO PROPOSITION 172 Background: On November 2, 1993, California voters approved Proposition 172, the Local Public Safety Protection and Improvement Act of 1993, which established a permanent statewide half- cent sale tax for support of local public safety activities in cities and counties. Proposition 172 was placed on the ballot by the Legislature and the~governor to partially replace the $2.6 billion 17 in property taxes shifted from local agencies to local school district's "educational revenue augmentation funds" (ERAF). Relative to the use of Proposition 172 revenues, Section 30052(b)(1) of the California Government Code defines "public safety services" as including, but not limited to, sheriffs, police, fire protection, county district attorneys and county corrections. Section 30052(b)(1) further states that public safety services do not include courts. To further protect the intended use of Proposition 172 taxes and to avoid the.perception that law enforcement and the legislative communities, local jurisdictions, would use these public safety funds to supplant local revenues that would otherwise accrue to public safety functions. AB2788 was enacted during the 1994 legislative session. It requires that a "Maintenance of Effort" threshold be met in order to utilize Proposition 172 funds. The bill established the 1992- 93 approved budget as the base year as the minimum funding level in order to receive full allocation of Proposition 172 revenues. Local Allocation of Proposition 172 Funds State voters were led to believe that a "yes" vote for Proposition 172 would mean more funds.for all "public safety services." Cities contribute 14% of ERAF funds, counties 77% and special districts 7% annually, but Proposition 172 allocations do not mirror ERAF property tax shifts; further local agencies vary in degree to which Proposition 172 compensates for ERAF property tax loss. ... While counties contribute significantly higher percentages of property taxes than city governments, in 1996 Senator Steve Peace (D-San Diego) introduced Senate Bill 8 which changed the allocation in San Diego County directing 94.35% of the funds to the county with the remaining 5.65% to the 18 cities in the county. Proposition 172 generates $200 million annually for the region with annual growth in the range of $6 million. Statewide, revenues approach $2.5 billion with counties receiving $2.15 billion (94%) and cities receiving $350 million (6%). (See attached spreadsheet.) Keeping Faith with the Voters The language of Proposition 172 promised the voters "an ironclad guarantee statewide that this money, estimated at approximately 1.4 billion dollars a year, would go to where it was needed the most: police, fire protection, district attorneys and jails." While all polls showed that the initiative was headed for resounding defeat, an unfortunate turn of events convinced the voters that such tax support was needed as viewers statewide witnessed the huge wildfire storms in Laguna Beach and Malibu and the heroic efforts of firefighters to protect life and property. 18 San Diego County has similar, yet a more extensive history of major wildfire including the following examples: FIRE NAME DATE ACRES STRUCTURES STRUCTURES DEATHS BURNED LOST DAMAGES Conejos Fire July 1950 62,'000 Not Available Not Available 0 Laguna Fire' Oct. 1970 190,000 382 Not Available 5 Harmony Fire Oct. 1996 8,600 122 142 1 (Carlsbad Elfin Forest, San Marcos) La Jolla Fire Sept. 1999 7,800 2 2 1 (Palomar Mountain) Viejas Fire Jan. 2001 10,353 23 6 0 Gavilan Fire Feb. 2002 6,000 43 13 0 (Fallbrook) Pines'Fire (Julian, July 2002 61,690 45 121 0 Ranchita) Cedar Oct. 2003 273,246 4,847 380 15 While several of these fires predate Proposition 172, San Diego County divested themselves of any public safety responsibilities in the area of fire protection in 1974, by terminating their contract with the California Department of Forestry to provide fire protection in the Unincorporated portions of the county. San Diego County continues to be without a consolidated fire department to provide fire protection to its constituents, yet continues to collect hundreds of millions of dollars annually in Proposition 172 monies. The responsibility for providing fire protection to these areas now falls on some 28 local fire agencies in these unincorporated areas. The incorporated areas either have their own fire departments or contract with several local fire agencies. Recommendation The disproportionate share of Proposition 172 funds in San Diego, and other urban counties, needs serious review and adjustment of the current formula. At its July 21, 2005 business meeting, the San Diego County Division of the League of California Cities unanimously approved to sponsor a statewide resolution at the League's October 8, 2005 State Convention. The request is to seek the endorsement and support of the delegates regarding the San Diego Division's efforts to amend the existing distribution formula including, but not limited to, a countywide initiative to change the current distribution formula of Proposition 172 to one based on the growth of population and sales tax increase. At its August 8, 2005 regular business meeting, the San Diego County Division again unanimously reaffirmed their July 21, 2005 action, to seek via resolution, the League's Delegates endorsement for proposed actions in the modification to the current formula used in the distribution of Proposition 172 revenues in San Diego County. 19 Prop. 172 Funds Collected and Distributed in San Diego Region AGENCY FY 1993-94 FY 1994-95 FY 1995-96 FY 1996-97 FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 TOTAL (EST) CountyofSD 105.340.565 113,271,73.~ 120,270.14z 125,678,85~ 132,797,55(; 143,051,26~ 165,574.86.c 178,908.42; 173,002,041 181,150,99~ 197,670,39~ 195,358,507 1,832.075,346 Cartsbad 275,351 359,445 382,05(~ 400,351 499.576 531,521 628,70(; 741,804 656,913 687,85~ 750,58.~ 741,804 6,655,960 Chula Vista 254,670 332,447 353,27(; 370,281 435,991 463,871 548.70(; 647,39(2 573,304 600,308 655,051 647,390 5,882,67." Coronado 93,858 122,524 130,231 136,467 168,12~ 178,87(~ 211,60(] 249,644 221,07~ 231,48~ 252,59~ 249,644 2,246,131 Del Mar 20,572 26,854 28,544 29,91C 37,20(~ 39,57~ 46,800 55,238 48,916 51,22(; 55,891 55,238 495,962 El Cajon 123,848 161,672 168,347~ 180,071 206,34~ 219,54¢ 259,70(; 306,395 271,332 284,112 310,021 306,395 2,797,77~ Encinitas 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Escondido 230,822 301,316 320,271 335,607 400,808 426,438 504,40{3 595,144 527,037 551,862 602,187 595,144 5,391,032 Impedal Beach 44,616 58,240 61,825 64,86~ 75,77c~ 80,62~ 95,400 112.522 99,645 104.33§ 113,853 112,522~ 1,024,234 LA MESA 85,721 . 111,901 117,764 124,63( 144,34~ 153,57[ 178,044 196,28~ 189,805 198,745 216,86§ 214,333 1,932,023 Lemon Grove 15,217 19,865 17,226 22,12[ 21,114 22,46zl 26.60(; 31,351 27,763 29,071 31,722 31,3511 295,86cj National City 51,793 67,612 64,771 75,306 79,391 84,467 99,90(; 117,884 104,394 109,311 119.28(; 117,8841 1,091,993 Oceanside 536,553 700.417 744.478 780,127 969,815 1,031,83(; 1,220,50(; 1,440,04~ 1,275,251 1,335,32C 1,457,089 1,440,048 12,931,47~ Poway 0 0 0 0 0 O, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 San Diego 2,537,690 3,312,703 3,521,095 3,689,700 4,438,578 4,722,402 5,585,80( 6,590,70(; 5,836,47~ 6,111,39£ 6,668,69.~ 6,590,700 59,605,92( San Marcos 50,395 65,785 66,567 73.272 81,591 86.809 102,70(; 121,152 107,28E 112,342 122,58~ 121,152 1,111,63.c Santee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Solana Beach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 (; 0 0 0 0 Vista 180,065 235,056 249,843 261,806 316,472 336,709 398,30£ 469,919 416,14,~ 435,744 475,48¢ 469,919 4,245,45{ TOTAL 109,841,73l~ 119,147,57; 126,496,432 132,223,381 140,672,678 151,429,972 175,482,013 190,583,898 183,357,380 191,994,10~ 209,502,29~ 207,052,031 1,937,783,49~ RESOLUTION REFERRED TO REVENUE AND TAXATION POLICY COMMITTEE ~,7. RESOLUTION RELATING TO PROPOSITION 172 Source: San Diego County Division Referred to: Public Safety and Revenue and Taxation Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: - Public Safety Policy Comrdittee: - Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee: NOTE: To see the resolution text and background, please refer to the Public Safety section. RESOLUTIONS REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION~ COMMUNICATION AND PUBLIC WORKS POLICY COMMITTEE ~,5. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACCORDS ADOPTED AT UNITED NATIONS WORLD ENVIRONMENT DAY Source: Gavin Newsom, Mayor, San Francisco Referred to: Environmental Quality; Housing, Community and Economic Development; and Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committees Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: - Environmental Quality Policy Committee: - Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committee: - Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committee: NOTE: To see the resolution text, please refer to the Environmental Quafity section. 8. RESOLUTION RELATING TO BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS Source: Gavin Newsom, Mayor, San Francisco Referred to: Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committee Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: WHEREAS, the United States ranks behind 15 other industrialized countries in the percentage of residents using broadband Internet connections; and WHEREAS, the availability of broadband service is critical to attracting, growing, and retaining businesses in the highly competitive global marketplace; and WHEREAS, broadband service is proving valuable to the economic transitioning and growth of distressed urban and rural communities; and 21 WHEREAS, broadband service to access information and resources is pivotal to eliminating the digital divide and promoting the economic and personal self-sufficiency of Iow- income individuals; and WHEREAS, local governments are seeking to meet the needs of their communities for broadband service where such service is unavailable, inadequate, or prohibitively expensive; and WHEREAS, local government can play an important roli~ in achieving President Bush's goal of universal broadband deployment by 2007; and WHEREAS, local governments are beginning to establish wireless municipal broadband networks for underserved residents, either directly or in partnership with others; and WHEREAS, for example, there has been a ten-fold increase in the number of public power companies offering broadband service over the past decade; and WHEREAS, the permissibility of and conditions under which local governments can offer broadband service will be considered in the upcoming rewrite of the Telecommunications Act of 1996; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, assembled in Annual Conference in San Francisco, October 8, 2005, that the League support state and federal legislation to ensure the continued ability of local governments to offer broadband Internet service access to citizens; and be it further RESOLVED, that the League of California Cities request the National League of Cities · to support federal legislation to ensure the continued ability of local governments to offer broadband Internet service access to citizens. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RESOLUTION NO. 8 Not Provided by Sponsor //////// [Note: No resolutions were assigned to the Community Services Policy Committee.] Policy/ACRES/05 Annual Conf/Resolutions/Resolutions 2005/RESOLUTIONS PACKET 05 22