ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 7 1 TO Mayor and Town Council June 2 2015 SUBJECT Consider positions on current state legislation BACKGROUND Every year hundreds of bills are introduced by members of the State legislature While only a fraction of bills make it through assigned Assembly and Senate committees floor votes and eventually to the Governor for signature it is important for local governments to take early positions on bills that may be helpful or harmful to cities Since incorporation in 1982 the Town of Danville has relied on the League of California Cities to advocate on behalf of cities interests League align with the Town s position The majority of positions taken by the Over the past several years the legislature has increasingly sought to further regulate and impose additional requirements and restrictions on local government As a result the Town has increased its efforts directed toward legislative advocacy and often weighs in on certain bills joining the League and other member cities to support or oppose proposed legislation Below is a list of the Town s positions from bills during this legislative cycle for the Town Council s consideration Additional bills are listed below DISCUSSION Bills Supported by the Town AB 323 Olsen CEQA Exemption roadway improvement as amended 4 6 15 The bill would extend the sunset date for current law that exempts city roadway improvement projects from California Environmental Quality Act CEQA requirements if the project is within the existing right of way improves safety and is within a jurisdiction with a population of less than 100 000 people AB 323 will result in lower project costs improvement projects and faster project delivery for roadway AB 1335 Atkins Building Homes and Jobs Act This bill would generate up to 700 million per year for affordable rental or ownership housing supportive housing emergency shelters transitional housing and other needs via a housing 75 recordation fee on real estate transactions with the exception of home sales
AB 327 Gordon Public Works volunteers as introduced The bill would eliminate the sunset date on Labor Code Section 1720 4 permanently enabling local governments to use volunteer labor on public works projects Members of the Danville community from businesses and faith based organizations to seniors and youth volunteer serve their community by volunteering on public works projects such as fence painting and landscaping AB 35 Chiu and Atkins Low income Housing Tax Credits The bill would increase the state s Low Income Housing Tax Credit by 300 million to build and rehabilitate affordable housing Increasing the available tax credits for low income housing would leverage additional federal tax credits and tax exempt bond authority ACA 4 Frazier Transportation Projects Local Special Taxes Voter Approval The constitutional amendment would lower the voter threshold requirements for special taxes by a local government for the purpose of proving funding for local transportation projects from two thirds approval to 55 approval Local transportation measures benefit the entire transportation system and support California s statewide policy goals of lower greenhouse gas emissions supporting goods movements and being accountable for how taxpayer dollars are spent Revenues from current sales tax measures support capital programs on the state and local system including local streets and roads Senate Bill 16 would expressly address the backlog of maintenance needs and is estimated to generate between 2 8 and 3 6 billion annually SB 16 Beall Transportation Funding As amended April 15 2015 This bill would provide much needed funding to the state and local roadway system over a period of five years to address the overwhelming backlog of preservation and maintenance Revenues would be collected from a 0 10 per gallon increase in the motor vehicle fuel tax imposed by the bill and 0 10 of the 0 12 per gallon increase in the diesel fuel excise tax imposed by the bill a 0 10 per gallon storage tax on motor vehicle fuel and 0 10 of a 0 12 per gallon storage tax on diesel fuel imposed by the bill an increase of 35 in the annual vehicle registration fee a new 100 annual vehicle registration fee applicable to zero emission motor vehicles Bills Opposed by the Tozvn SB 608 Liu The Right to Rest Act The bill would provide homeless persons the right to use public space without discrimination based on their housing status While well intentioned SB 608 creates a special set of exemptions privileges and rights for the homeless to occupy public and private property without complying with laws that apply to all others in society solutions for homeless programs housing or services Furthermore SB 608 contains no The Town has joined the State Legislation 2 June 2 2015
League of California Cities stance that this approach would create social disorder and undermine the ability of all others to access clean and non threatening public spaces while jeopardizing property rights and the economic viability of local businesses AB 34 Bonta Medical Cannabis State Regulation While AB 34 contains some provisions acknowledging cities and towns constitutional police power p 9 lines 16 17 there are other provisions in the bill that are extremely troubling to cities in that they appear to undermine cities existing land use authority and police power including the ability to license or permit individual businesses and to subsequently engage in enforcement of local ordinances in relation to those businesses The League supports AB 266 Cooley a more balanced approach that would establish a bureau within the Department of Consumer Affairs that would regulate dispensaries cultivation sites transporters and manufacturers of medical marijuana while respecting local authority The Town believes that local municipalities have the right to prohibit the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries in their jurisdiction as the Town did in September 2011 No 2011 02 Ordinance AB 718 Chu Removal of Regulatory Authority Vehicles Used For Human Habitation The bill would prohibit local agencies from enforcing laws and ordinances or otherwise subject to civil or criminal penalties the act of people sleeping or resting in a lawfully parked motor vehicle The Town joined the League s position that town and city parking locations whether on public or private property other than campgrounds were never intended or designed for residential occupancy Such uses raise major issues of sanitation as well as the ability of residents to feel secure in their homes and enable the conduct of business activity Bonus Lazu This measure as drafted would AB 744 Chau Parking and Density eliminate local minimum parking requirements that can be imposed on senior housing special needs housing and housing within one half mile of a major transit stop Parking requirements vary across the state and reflect local realities and community preferences In many California communities like Danville transit networks are not as dense with transit networks less developed safe or reliable making car ownership a necessity for commuting to work shopping taking children to school and other daily activities Bills for Consideration AB 528 Baker San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District strikes prohibition This bill would prohibit employees of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District from engaging in a strike or work stoppage if the transit district board maintains State Legislation 3 June 2 2015
the compensation and benefit provisions of an expired contract and an employee or employee organization has agreed to a provision prohibiting strikes in the expired or previous written labor contract The bill would provide that an employee whom the transit district employer finds willfully engaged in a strike or work stoppage in violation of these provisions is subject to dismissal if that finding is sustained upon conclusion of the appropriate proceedings necessary ACA 1 Olsen Legislative procedure The California Constitution prohibits a bill other than the Budget Bill from being heard or acted on by a committee or either house of the Legislature until the 31st day after the bill is introduced unless the house dispenses with this requirement by rollcall vote entered in the journal 3 4 of the membership concurring This measure would add an additional exception to this 31 day waiting period by authorizing a committee to hear or act on a bill if the bill in the form to be considered by the committee has been in print and published on the Internet for at least 15 days Periodic review and consideration of these and other bills currently under consideration by the legislature provide an opportunity for the Town Council to provide additional policy direction on Town support or opposition PUBLIC CONTACT Posting of the meeting agenda serves as notice to the general public FISCAL IMPACT None RECOMMENDATION Receive report and provide appropriate feedback Prepared by Nat Rojanasathira Assistant to the Town Manager Attachments A Assembly B AB 528 Fact Sheet C Assembly Bill No 528 Bill Text Constitutional Amendment No 1 Resolution Text State Legislation 4 June 2 2015
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 2015 16 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No 528 Introduced by Assembly Member Baker Coauthors Assembly Members Bigelow Grove Harper Lackey Olsen and Wilk February 23 2015 An act to amend Section 3616 of and to add Section 3616 1 to the Government Code relating to the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL S DIGEST AB 528 as introduced Baker San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District strikes prohibition Existing law creates the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District and establishes provisions regulating the collective bargaining of the employees and the board of directors of that district Existing law prescribes procedures specifically relating to the collective bargaining of transit districts and authorizes the Governor when it appears a strike will significantly disrupt transportation services and endanger public health safety and welfare to appoint a board to investigate issues in connection with these labor negotiations and make a report Existing law prohibits a strike during the period of investigation and permits the Governor upon receiving a report from a board of investigation to request the Attorney General to petition a court to enjoin the strike as specified This bill would prohibit employees of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District from engaging in a strike or work stoppage if the transit district board maintains the compensation and benefit provisions of an expired contract and an employee or employee organization has ATTACHMENT A
and AB 528 2 agreed to a provision prohibiting strikes in the expired or previous written labor contract The bill would provide that an employee whom the transit district employer finds willfully engaged in a strike or work stoppage in violation of these provisions is subject to dismissal if that finding is sustained upon conclusion of the appropriate proceedings necessary for the imposition of a disciplinary action Vote majority Appropriation no Fiscal committee no State mandated local program no The people of the State of California do enact asfollows 1 SECTION 1 Section 3616 of the Government Code is amended 2 to read 3 3616 Except as expressly provided subdivision by b of 4 Section 361 Sectio 3614 3612 and Sections 3614 and 5 3616 1 nothing in this chapter shall be construed to grant or 6 deprive employees of a right to strike 7 SEC 2 Section 3616 1 is added to the Government Code to 8 read 9 3616 1 a This section shall apply to employees of the San 10 Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District as created in Section 11 28600 of the Public Utilities Code 12 b Notwithstanding any other law if the Board of Directors of 13 the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District maintains the 14 compensation and benefit provisions of an expired contract and 15 an employee or employee organization has agreed to a provision 16 prohibiting strikes in the expired or previous written labor contract 17 then a strike or work stoppage by employees of the district is 18 hereby deemed contrary to the public interest and is prohibited 19 c An employee whom the transit district employer finds 20 willfully engaged in a strike or work stoppage in violation of 21 subdivision b by failing to report for work shall be subject to 22 dismissal from his or her employment if that finding is sustained 23 upon conclusion of the appropriate proceedings necessary for the 24 imposition of disciplinary action upon the employee C 99
Assemblywoman Catharine Baker Protection What is the background of this proposal The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District BART was formed by the state legislature in 1957 and has established provisions regulating collective bargaining of the employees and the board of directors Over 400 000 riders rely daily on BART to get to work go to school see the doctor visit family and friends and engage in their communities BART transit services are essential to Bay Area residents and commuters and must be protected There have been five labor strikes in BART history Two strikes in 2013 created havoc for riders jammed Bay Area roads and caused environmental damage with greater carbon emissions impacting air quality The 2013 strikes brought transportation to a grinding halt in the Bay Area and cost over 73 million dollars a day to the Bay Area economy These 2013 strikes occurred even though BART workers had a no strike clause in their most recent contract EXdsting Law Existing law prescribes procedures specifically relating to the collective bargaining of transit districts including BART Existing law also authorizes the Governor when it appears a strike will significantly disrupt transportation services and endanger public health safety and welfare to appoint a board to investigate issues in connection with these labor negotiations and make a report Existing law prohibits a strike during this period of investigation and permits the Governor upon receiving a report from a board of investigation to request the Attorney General to petition a court to enjoin the strike as specified What is the problem to be addressed In past and current labor contracts for BART strikes and work stoppages are prohibited by no strike clauses Strikes and work stoppages are also prohibited during times of investigation that are called by the Governor A loophole however was made glaringly apparent when BART workers twice went on strike in 2013 The workers went on strike anyway because the contract with a no strike clause had expired They went on strike even though they continued to receive wages and benefits under the expired contract This bill closes the loophole and ensures public safety health and welfare are protected by declaring that if BART employees continue to receive pay and other benefits provided by BART management under the expired contract the worker must abide by the no strike clause of that contract What does this bill do This bill protects BART riders and the Bay Area commuters and is fair to BART workers This bill would prohibit BART employees from engaging in a strike or work stoppage during contract negotiations if the transit district board maintains the compensation and benefit provisions of an expired contract and an employee or employee organization has agreed to a provision prohibiting strikes in the expired contract The bill would provide that an employee whom the transit district employer finds willfully engaging in a strike or work stoppage in violation of these provisions is subject to dismissal if that finding is sustained upon conclusion of the appropriate proceedings necessary for the imposition of a disciplinary action This bill will not change existing or future procedures for collective bargaining of BART labor contracts ATTACHMENT B
Support Bay Area Council Innovation Tri Valley Leadership Group The Mayor of Pleasanton CA The Mayor of Dublin CA City of Moraga Who is the staff contact for this bill Faith Lane 916 319 2016 faith lane@asm ca gov
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 2015 i6 REGULAR SESSION Assembly Constitutional Amendment No I Introduced by Assembly Member Olsen Principal coauthors Senators Huff and Wolk December 1 2014 Assembly Constitutional Amendment No 1 A resolution to propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution of the State by amending Section 8 of Article IV thereof relating to the Legislature LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL S DIGEST ACA 1 as introduced Olsen Legislative procedure The California Constitution prohibits a bill other than the Budget Bill from being heard or acted on by a committee or either house of the Legislature until the 31st day after the bill is introduced unless the house dispenses with this requirement by rollcall vote entered in the journal X of the membership concurring This measure would add an additional exception to this 31 day waiting period by authorizing a committee to hear or act on a bill if the bill in the form to be considered by the committee has been in print and published on the Internet for at least 15 days Existing provisions of the California Constitution prohibit either house of the Legislature from passing a bill until the bill with amendments has been printed and distributed to the Members This measure would also prohibit either house of the Legislature from passing a bill until the bill in the form to be voted on has been made available to the public in print and published on the Internet for at least 72 hours preceding the vote This requirement would not apply to specified urgency bills upon the submission by the Governor to the 99 ATTACHMENT C
ACA 1 2 Legislature of a written statement that it is necessary to dispense with the requirement to address a state of emergency declared by the Governor Vote 2 3 Appropriation no Fiscal committee no State mandated local program no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Resolved by the Assembly the Senate concurring That the Legislature of the State of California at its 2015 16 Regular Session commencing on the first day of December 2014 two thirds of the membership of each house concurring hereby proposes to the people of the State of California that the Constitution of the State be amended as follows That Section 8 ofarticle IV thereof is amended to read SEC 8 a At regular sessions no bill other than the budget bill may be heard or acted on by a committee or either house until the 31 st day after the bill is introduced tinless the except in either of the folloiving circumstances 1 A committee or either house may hear or act on a bill ifthe house dispenses with this requirement by rollcall vote entered in the journal thfeefetifs three fourths of the membership concurring 2 A committee may hear or act on a bill ifthe bill in theform to be considered by the committee has been in print andpublished on the Internetfor at least 15 days b 1 The Legislature may make no law except by statute and may enact no statute except by bill No bill may be passed unless it is read by title on 4 three days in each house except that the a house may dispense with this requirement by rollcall vote entered in the journal ids hvo thirds of the membership concurring No bill may be passed until the bill with amendments has been printed and distributed to the members No bill may be passed unless by rollcall vote entered in the journal a majority of the membership of each house concurs 2 A No bill may be passed in either house until the bill in the form to be voted on has been made available to the public in print and published on the Internet for at least 72 hours before the vote B This paragraph does not apply to a bill that contains an urgency clause ifthe Governor submits to the Legislature a ivritten statement for that bill that dispensing ivith the requirement in M
3 ACA 1 1 subparagraph A is necessary to address a state of emergency 2 declared by the Governor Emergency for the purposes of this 3 paragraph has the same meaning as in paragraph 2 of 4 subdivision c ofsection 3 ofarticle XIIIB and does not include 5 afiscal emergency declared pursuant to Section 10 ofthis article 6 c 1 Except as provided in paragraphs 2 and 3 of s 7 subdivision a statute enacted at a regular session shall go into 8 effect on January 1 next following a 90 day period from the date 9 of enactment of the statute and a statute enacted at a special session 10 shall go into effect on the 91 st day after adjournment of the special 11 session at which the bill was passed 12 2 A statute other than a statute establishing or changing 13 boundaries of any legislative congressional or other election 14 district enacted by a bill passed by the Legislature on or before 15 the date the Legislature adjourns for a joint recess to reconvene in 16 the second calendar year of the biennium of the legislative session 17 and in the possession of the Governor after that date shall go into 18 effect on January 1 next following the enactment date of the statute 19 unless before January 1 a copy of a referendum petition affecting 20 the statute is submitted to the Attorney General pursuant to 21 subdivision d of Section 10 of Article II in which event the 22 statute shall go into effect on the 91 st day after the enactment date 23 unless the petition has been presented to the Secretary of State 24 pursuant to subdivision b of Section 9 of Article I1 25 3 Statutes calling elections statutes providing for tax levies 26 or appropriations for the usual current expenses of the State and 27 urgency statutes shall go into effect immediately upon their 28 enactment 29 d Urgency statutes are those necessary for immediate 30 preservation of the public peace health or safety A statement of 31 facts constituting the necessity shall be set forth in one section of 32 the bill In each house the section and the bill shall be passed 33 separately each by rollcall vote entered in the journal two thirds 34 two thirds of the membership concurring An urgency statute may 35 not create or abolish any office or change the salary term or duties 36 of any office or grant any franchise or special privilege or create 37 any vested right or interest D 99