HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 313-09CMR:313:09 Page 1 of 4
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
ATTN: POLICY AND SERVICES COMMITTEE
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
DATE: JULY 15, 2009 CMR: 313:09
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Council Approval of the City’s Legislative Program
and Structure
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Policy and Services Committee review revisions to the City’s
Legislative Action Manual and recommend approval of the legislative program and structure to
the Council.
BACKGROUND
On May 12, 2009, staff presented a draft of the City’s Legislative Action Program Manual
(Attachment A) to the Policy & Services Committee for review and recommendation to Council.
Specifically, staff requested feedback on the various sections of the manual with a particular
emphasis on the role of Council during the legislative process. The draft minutes of the May 12
meeting are included with this report as Attachment B. The Committee discussed the overall
legislative guiding principles as well as other elements of the program and continued the item to
their next meeting. There was a particular interest in having the City Manager attend the
meeting to discuss, in particular, legislative action in Sacramento.
DISCUSSION
Based on the May meeting, there were four key follow up issues for the Committee:
1) Further define role for City Council in legislative process
2) Effective legislative action in Sacramento and regionally
3) Best practices in other cities
4) Minor language changes to guiding principles and manual
1) Further define role for City Council in legislative process
CMR:313:09 Page 2 of 4
The role of the City Council is critical to the effectiveness of the City’s overall legislative
program. As outlined in the manual, the Council’s specific responsibilities include the
following:
- Conduct an annual review and update of legislative priorities
- Establish legislative priorities, taking into account the Council priorities adopted
each year
- Consider legislative issues brought to the Council’s attention by staff, citizens,
organizations, and others and determine what, if any, position the City should take
- Determine Council positions on resolutions proposed for adoption by the League of
California Cities and the National League of Cities
- Suggest areas for staff action concerning legislation
- Assume an active advocacy role with legislators on behalf of the City of Palo Alto
During the previous Committee discussion, there were several additional key issues that
Committee members raised with respect to the Council’s involvement in the legislative process.
The first focused specifically on the Council’s involvement with the City’s federal lobbyist. The
City is currently in the process of interviewing firms to serve as the City’s advocate in
Washington, DC. As part of this new contract, one key provision will be the more active
involvement of Council in the federal legislative process. Once the firm is hired, staff anticipates
setting up a study session with the Council and key staff from the selected firm to establish the
City’s priorities as well as expectations for Council involvement in the federal process
throughout the year. Staff will establish mechanisms for ongoing communications and status
updates to the Council throughout the federal legislative year. Page 4 of the legislative manual
(Attachment A) now includes language regarding the Council’s role with the City’s federal
lobbyist.
One of the key elements for the fall discussion with the federal lobbyist will be expectations for
Council travel to Washington, DC. This was one of the other key issues the Committee raised
during the discussion on May 12. The Committee had an interest in establishing guidelines for
travel to Washington, DC and to Sacramento. Staff recommends, at a minimum, adding
language on page 4 of the manual that indicates Council legislative travel will be consistent with
existing policies and procedures on travel expenses.
One other suggested role for the Council warrants further discussion. This role would be to
leverage existing community relationships as political assets. There are many influential people
within the Palo Alto community, from political to business leaders. By identifying and
connecting with these individuals, the City could potentially utilize these relationships as
additional leverage points in Sacramento and Washington.
2) Effective legislative action in Sacramento and regionally
The Committee spent a fair amount of time at the previous meeting discussing the most effective
strategies for legislative action in Sacramento and with various regional agencies. One of the
key issues related to Sacramento was the discussion of whether to hire a State-level lobbying
firm. Additionally, the Committee was interested in exploring how to effectively engage with
the League of California Cities around Palo Alto issues. The Committee expressed an interest in
CMR:313:09 Page 3 of 4
having an “expert” come and discuss these issues. Staff was able to talk with the Legislative
Director for the League of California Cities regarding a discussion with the Council around
effective state lobbying efforts. Given the current legislative action necessary around the State
budget, the Legislative Director’s schedule did not permit him to attend this meeting. However,
he did indicate a willingness to come talk with the Council in the fall. Staff will be working with
him to schedule a date for this discussion.
Additionally, the Committee spent time discussing involvement with regional agencies. The key
issues were: 1) With what agencies should the Council/City have involvement? 2) How should
Councilmembers report back to the full Council on regional agency actions? and 3) How do
Councilmembers serving as representatives to regional agencies obtain City positions on issues?
Attachment C provides a preliminary listing of regional agencies. Staff would like to receive
feedback from the Committee on this list and the key issues with respect to regional agencies.
Are agencies missing? Are there certain agencies where the Council should focus its policy
attention?
3) Best practices in other cities
Staff has spoken with and researched legislative programs in several other cities and will present
this information at the Committee meeting.
4) Minor language changes to guiding principles and manual
The Committee recommended some minor changes to the language in the guiding principles and
the manual. The most substantive language changes occurred in the overall guiding principles.
The Committee had some language changes and recommended the addition of a fourth guiding
principle. Based on this feedback, staff recommends that the guiding principles now read as
follows:
Protect local revenue sources and prevent unfunded mandates
a. Oppose Federal or State legislation, policies and budgets that have negative impacts on
services, revenues and costs. Ensure that legislation, policies and budgets do not detract
from Palo Alto’s ability to draw on local revenue sources.
Protect and increase local government discretion but in balance with City values and
priorities
a. Ensure that legislation, policies and budgets retain or increase, but generally don’t
decrease, the amount of local discretion held by the City and protect local decision
making. Oppose legislation, policies and budgets that reduce the authority and/or ability
of local government to determine how best to effectively operate local programs, services
and activities. The City retains the right to exceed State goals, standards or targets.
Protect and increase funding for specific programs and services
a. Support County, State and Federal funding for local service by maximizing existing
funding levels and seeking new and alternative funding for programs. Promote increases
in the allocation of funds to cities and flexibility in distribution.
Proactively advocate on behalf of the City
a. Identify key legislative areas to monitor annually. Take a proactive role in working with
Federal and State legislators to draft and sponsor legislation around key City priorities.
CMR:313:09 Page 4 of 4
Staff is proposing three other substantive changes to the manual based on input from the
Committee. The first occurs on page 3 and adds a direct link between the City Council and
Legislative Bodies to the basic steps diagram. The second occurs on page 7 and inserts language
applying the process outlined to only key or controversial issues. The third change occurs on
page 11 and discusses scheduling meetings with other elected officials during the appropriate
times of the legislative calendars. Additionally, staff will be working to develop three process
flow charts that would describe: 1) the process for reacting to legislation; 2) the process for
sponsoring legislation; and 3) the process for pursuing funding. Staff would like to develop
these processes in conjunction with the City’s federal lobbyist, once the new contract is finalized
later this summer. There will also be separate charts for State-level issues. There is a
placeholder identified in the manual for these on page 3.
RESOURCE IMPACT
There are no resource impacts associated with the recommendations in this report.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This discussion will help the Council further refine policy goals around the City’s regional, State
and Federal legislative programs.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This report is not a project requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Draft Legislative Program Action Manual
Attachment B: Draft minutes from May 12, 2009 Policy & Services meeting
Attachment C: Listing of Regional Agencies
PREPARED BY: __________________________________
KELLY MORARIU
Assistant to the City Manager
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: __________________________________
JAMES KEENE
City Manager
1
Attachment A
Legislative Action Program Manual
Policy Statement
The objective of the City of Palo Alto legislative action program is to keep the City Council,
community and staff fully advised of proposed legislation with a potential impact upon the City.
It is the City’s general policy to take timely and effective action in support of or opposition to
proposed legislation affecting Palo Alto at the County, State, Federal levels. In addition the City,
where appropriate, will take the initiative to seek introduction of new legislation beneficial to
Palo Alto and other local government entities.
City Council Priorities
The groundwork for the City’s legislative strategy is the Council’s priorities.
Economic Health of the City of Palo Alto
Civic Engagement for the Common Good
Environmental Protection
Overall Guiding Principles
Protect local revenue sources and prevent unfunded mandates
a. Oppose Federal or State legislation, policies and budgets that have negative impacts on
services, revenues and costs. Ensure that legislation, policies and budgets do not detract
from Palo Alto’s ability to draw on local revenue sources.
Protect and increase local government discretion but in balance with City values and
priorities
a. Ensure that legislation, policies and budgets retain or increase, but generally don’t
decrease, the amount of local discretion held by the City and protect local decision
making. Oppose legislation, policies and budgets that reduce the authority and/or ability
of local government to determine how best to effectively operate local programs, services
and activities. The City retains the right to exceed State goals, standards or targets.
Protect and increase funding for specific programs and services
a. Support County, State and Federal funding for local service by maximizing existing
funding levels and seeking new and alternative funding for programs. Promote increases
in the allocation of funds to cities and flexibility in distribution.
Proactively advocate on behalf of the City
a. Identify key legislative areas to monitor annually. Take a proactive role in working with
Federal and State legislators to draft and sponsor legislation around key City priorities.
2009 Legislative Priorities
1. Support the Public Works Department and State Assemblymember Ira Ruskin’s Office in
proposing legislation for new composting technology.
2. Seek funding through the Federal appropriations process for High Speed Broadband Network
(Fiber to the Premises), Citywide Emergency Vehicle Preemption, Palo Alto Art Center
2
Building, Clara Drive Storm Drain Improvements and the San Francisquito Creek Flood
Damage Reduction Project.
3. Seek grant funding through State and Federal departments, given the passage of the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, based upon the priority project list
adopted by Council earlier this year.
4. Advocate with State and Federal representatives for the City’s stimulus grant applications as
well as the City’s regular Federal appropriations requests.
5. Maintain and support the Utilities Department Legislative Program, which preserves and
enhances local flexibility in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility programs
and rates for City customers.
Contents
Internal Coordination of the Legislative Action Program p. 4
The Role of the City Council p. 4
The Role of the City Manager’s Office p. 5
The Role of the Departments p. 5
Guidelines for Evaluating Legislation p. 6
Legislative Advocacy p. 7
Lobbying Methods p. 8
Guidelines for Letter Writing p. 10
Procedure for City Council meetings with other Elected Representatives p. 14
Federal Legislative Timeline p. 14
California State Senate Legislative Timeline 2009 p. 15
City Council Timeline p. 15
3
Basic Steps in the City’s Legislative Action Program
Placeholder for Process Flow Charts:
1) Reacting to legislation
2) Sponsoring legislation
3) Pursuing funding
Internal Coordination of the Legislative Action Program
City Manager’s
Office
City Council
Proposed
Legislation
Legislative Body
Departments and
Divisions
1
2 3
4*
6
54*
7
4
The basic steps in the City’s legislative action program are illustrated in the accompanying
diagram (above).
1. Legislation is brought to the City’s attention by several means: the League of California
Cities, the National League of Cities, Council Members, City staff, citizens, professional
or governmental newsletters, legislators, the legislative tracking service, etc.
2. The City Manager’s Office reviews the proposed legislation (the bill text) and, if
warranted, requests assistance from one or more departments. Departments are urged to
take the initiative to identify legislation of importance to the City and not wait for the
City Manager’s Office to ask for their involvement.
3. The Department evaluates the bill for its impact upon Palo Alto, recommends a position
and potential action, and drafts a statement or letter for use by the City Manager’s Office,
as appropriate.
4. At this juncture, action can proceed in either of two ways:
a. If the Council has previously adopted a policy directly relevant to the legislation,
the City Manager’s Office proceeds to prepare a letter for the Mayor’s signature.
b. If the Council policy relative to the legislation does not exist, or if the issue is
politically controversial, or if there is significant local interest in the issue, the
proposed legislation is referred to Council. (See Legislative Advocacy)
5. The Council will consider the information provided in a staff report, determine its
position on the legislation and provide direction to staff.
6. The City Manager’s Office coordinates the lobbying activities according to Council
direction through this policy and procedure manual.
7. The Council will connect with the various legislative bodies in several ways throughout
the year:
a. Joint meetings with elected representatives
b. Visits to Sacramento and Washington DC
c. Direct contact with elected representatives by phone or letter on key issues
The Role of the Council
The City Council has ultimate responsibility for determining the position the City shall take on
legislative issues. Council positions applicable to legislation accumulate over the years and
require periodic reevaluation to assure they are still relevant to the City’s needs and interests.
The Council generally takes positions only on issues that are of relevance to the City of Palo
Alto.
The Council’s specific responsibilities include:
Conduct an annual review and update of legislative priorities at both the State and
Federal levels
Meet annually with the City’s federal lobbyist to establish federal legislative priorities
and strategies, given current trends in Washington
Establish legislative priorities, taking into account the Council priorities adopted each
year
Consider legislative issues brought to the Council’s attention by staff, citizens,
organizations and others and determine what, if any, position the City should take
5
Determine Council positions on resolutions proposed for adoption by the League of
California Cities and the National League of Cities
Suggest areas for staff action concerning legislation
Assume an active advocacy role with legislators on behalf of the City. This may include
travel to Washington, DC and/or to Sacramento. Any such travel will be consistent with
current City policies/procedures on travel.
The Role of the City Manager’s Office
The City Manager’s Office is the central coordinator of the City’s legislative program. The
responsibilities and activities of the office include the following:
Ensure the consistency of legislative policy throughout the City
Serve as a clearinghouse and record keeper for all legislative activity occurring with the
City
Coordinate contacts and communications with legislators and staff
Coordinate the evaluation of proposed legislation that may affect the City
Disseminate information on legislation of interest to departments and division within the
City
Encourage suggestions from other departments concerning subjects for legislative action
Provide feedback to departments on progress of legislation of interest
Keep Council informed on the status of the City’s legislative action program
Recommend priorities for legislative action, in order to avoid diminishing the
effectiveness of the City’s lobbying activities
Plan, coordinate, and facilitate lobbying activities by Council Members and City staff.
Maintain legislative files (bill texts, correspondence, records of lobbying activity,
background information, Council policies)
Serve as liaison to the League of California Cities, National League of Cities, and other
organizations and jurisdictions concerning legislative activities
Coordinate the annual review of legislative positions and preparation of the City’s
legislative platform
The Role of Departments
The participation of various departments within the City is essential to the success of the
Legislative Action Program. The program requires departments to take responsibility for
identifying, evaluating and monitoring legislation that relates to their functional areas. The
program must be cooperative and interactive. Effective lobbying and testimony depends on
factual data concerning the impacts and implications of proposed legislation upon the City’s
operations, services, and finances. The responsibilities of the departments include the following:
Inform the Manager’s Office of legislative issues of importance to the City
Designate a key contact within the department or division who will be responsible for
coordinating the evaluation of legislation and monitoring those legislative issues of direct
significance to the department. Continue to monitor bills as they progress through the
Legislature or Congress
6
Establish a system within the department for assuring that requests for legislation
evaluation are responded to promptly
Draft letters and provide analysis of legislation as requested by City Manager’s Office
Maintain a legislative file with the department to assure consistency of policy
recommendations
Establish mechanisms within the department for accessing direct information on
legislation, e.g. computer networks, newsletters, etc
Network with other cities, agencies, professional organizations, etc. to gain background
information and broader perspective on legislative issues
Suggest organizations, individuals, publications, and other legislators who may be allies
in lobbying the City’s position on certain legislation
Become acquainted with the League of California Cities staff person with responsibility
for issues related to the department
Understand and adhere to the City’s Legislative Advocacy Policy. Consult the Manager’s
Office if there are questions.
Annually, provide to the Manager’s Office the department’s recommendations for the
ensuing year’s legislative platform. This shall include: 1) a review of existing positions,
2) statements of underlying policies and principles, and 3) priorities related to specific
legislative issues.
Guidelines for Evaluating Legislation
Several resources are available to departments that can enable them to identify proposed
legislation and track its progress. The League of California Cities and National League of Cities
publications contain information on Congressional legislation. Departments can also subscribe to
legislative announcements through professional associations as well as State and Congressional
websites.
Bills often are amended several times in the course traveled between introduction and final
approval. Analyses and letters expressing the City’s position should always be based on the latest
version. When reviewing the bill text, do not rely solely on the Legislative Counsel’s Digest;
read the entire bill. The bill will contain the new or amended language proposed for the
California Code. If the department wishes to compare the proposed language with the actual
language of existing law, and does not have the relevant code (Government Code, Vehicle Code,
Election Code, Revenue and Taxation Code, etc.) in the department, contact the City Attorney’s
Office with questions.
If the bill is later amended, language that is deleted will be lined out and new proposed language
will be shown in italics. Proper timing is vital in the legislative process. The City’s views on a
bill are of value only if they reach a legislator or committee before they vote on a bill.
Departments should provide the City Manager’s Office with information on bills of importance
to the City as soon as they are aware of them.
A Citywide perspective
Often, proposed legislation will have the potential for affecting more than one department. Not
always will the impact be the same. While the proposal may be beneficial from the perspective
7
of one department, it may have negative impacts for another department. It is essential that these
differences be reconciled and a common citywide position is determined. The City Manager’s
Office will work with Departments to reconcile differences.
Stating the City’s position
Departments should be aware of policies and programs contained in the City of Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan which relate to their area of responsibility. The City Manager’s Office can
verify if the League of California Cities or National League of Cities has taken a position on a
bill.
The most effective arguments in lobbying a bill are those which contain hard data about the
effects on the City’s operations and services. If the bill has potential significant effects for the
City, it is well worth the time spent to assemble the examples and cost figures.
The best criticism is that which contains suggestions for improvement. If there is little likelihood
of defeating a bill the City opposes, indicate what could be changed to make it more palatable.
Legislators and their staffs are more receptive to communications which offer concrete ideas.
If the department recommendation is to support, oppose, or amend a bill, it is important to draft
the body of a letter that the City Manager’s Office can use in writing to the legislators. The
Manager’s Office will put the letter in final form and send it to the appropriate committees,
legislators, etc. A copy of the finalized letter will be routed to the evaluating department for its
records.
Legislative Advocacy
The Council is the official voice of the City of Palo Alto. The final authority for determining the
position that shall be taken by the City on proposed legislation rests with the Council. The
process outlined below would likely be followed only for key and controversial topics. In many
instances, due to timing or the nature of the issue, the Mayor may sign a letter supporting or
opposing legislation on behalf of the City. This position would need to be generally consistent
with the City’s overall guiding legislative principles or the annually adopted priorities.
Process: (Taken from CMR: 315:02)
1. Two Councilmembers draft a Council Colleagues Memorandum to refer a ballot measure
or legislative issue to the Policy and Services Committee for review.
2. Staff generates an informational report for the Policy and Services Committee
summarizing the ballot measure or legislative issue. This report will include an analysis
of City policy as it relates to the item, if applicable. It will also indicate if the League of
California Cities has taken a position on the issue.
3. The item is agendized for the Policy and Services Committee meeting.
4. The Policy and Services Committee reviews and discusses the ballot measure or
legislative issue at the meeting.
5. Policy and Services Committee members vote on the propositions and/or legislative issue
that the Committee determines are consistent with the City’s interests.
6. If the vote is unanimous, the matter is forwarded to the Council as consent calendar item.
8
7. If a timeliness issue exists, the item will referred to Council without minutes, and a one
page executive summary will be provided. If no timeliness issue exists, the item will be
referred with minutes in the usual manner.
Signature on communication regarding legislation. Letters and other communications expressing
the City’s position on legislation will customarily bear the signature of the Mayor, particularly
when the legislation relates to areas of Comprehensive Plan policies and programs, other Council
adopted policies, issues of Council interest, and fiscal matters.
If the legislation’s principal impact is on the City’s operating procedures, the communication
may be signed by the City Manager. In these instances, it may increase the effectiveness of the
communication to have it co-signed by the head of the department most directly affected.
In order to keep the Council and others informed of all City communications on legislation,
copies of the letters will be are distributed in the Council agenda packet.
Independent lobbying by City personnel. City employees are not to lobby in the name of the City
of Palo Alto unless the activity has been approved by the department head and City Manager has
been informed in advance of the activity.
City advisory commissions and committees. City employees who are staff or liaison to Council-
appointed advisory commissions and committees should encourage the bodies to bring to the
attention of the Council proposed legislation upon which they recommend the Council take a
position.
The Palo Alto Municipal Code (Section 2.22.060(f)) authorizes the Human Relations
Commission to adopt independent positions on legislation, provided the City Council has not
taken an official position with respect to the legislation. All legislative letters sent by the HRC
and its task forces shall be copied for the City Council.
Lobbying Methods
Listed here are a number of ways to inform and persuade legislators and others of the City’s
position on proposed legislation.
Departmental participation in the planning and implementation of many of these activities is
desirable and important. Departments should let the City Manager’s Office know of their interest
and suggestions for lobbying bills they have evaluated.
Letters to
The authors of proposed legislation
The City’s elected representatives in the State Legislature and Congress
The Chair and members of legislative committees
The Governor or President
9
If the letter is being sent within three working days of the scheduled committee hearing of floor
vote, the letter will be faxed or emailed. All records of faxes, mailings, e-mail, will be
maintained by the City Manager’s Office.
Telephone calls
Phone calls are useful for discussing with legislative staff the content and implications of
a bill and for suggesting amendments or language clarification. However, many
committees’ rules prevent them from counting phone calls as a legitimate expression of a
City’s position on a bill. Pro and con positions are recorded only if they are received in
writing.
Meetings with Palo Alto’s elected representatives either in the district or in Sacramento and
Washington.
It is the Council’s practice to invite legislators representing Palo Alto to an annual
meeting to discuss all issues of importance to the City during that legislative session.
Councilmembers are encouraged to attend legislative days set by the National League of
Cities and League of California Cities.
Resolutions
The Council is sometimes asked to adopt a resolution expressing its position on a bill.
Resolutions are frequently sought by organizations as an indication of widespread
support for a position, but they are less effective than letters when communicating
directly with a legislator.
Testimony
Testifying in person at a legislative committee hearing provides an opportunity to present
the City’s position and respond to questions. The City Manager, the Mayor, a
Councilmember, or the staff person with particular expertise in the subject assumes the
responsibility.
Editorial support from newspapers serving Palo Alto community
Staff member must seek approval from Manager’s Office before submitting editorials in
newspapers.
Press Conferences
Press conferences are called by the Mayor and Councilmembers and are staged in a
location relevant to the issues being lobbied. Any press conference should be coordinated
with the City Manager’s Office.
10
Coalitions with other jurisdictions
These alliances are not limited to governmental bodies, but extend to all segments of the
broader community that can similarly be affected by the legislation, e.g. business,
nonprofit organization, environmental groups, etc.
Registered lobbyists are retained by the City when their specific skills and expertise are required.
Guidelines for Letter writing
Concentrate on the letter content, rather than format. The City Manager’s Office will
produce the final letter, addressing it to the proper legislators or committees and securing
the appropriate signature. The process can be expedited if the originating department
provides the draft of the letter electronically.
At the very start of the letter, indicate the bill number or title that is the subject of the
letter.
A short concise letter is generally more effective than a lengthy treatise. (Several short
letters will carry more weight than one long letter; if there are many good arguments for
supporting or opposing a bill, provide them all to the Manager’s Office but in a form
where they can be selectively used in several communications.)
Provide specific examples of the impact of the legislation upon Palo Alto, e.g. estimated
cost or savings, effect upon taxpayers and residents, relationship to the City’s policies,
programs, charter, etc.
Think of examples that may be particularly newsworthy.
Relate, when feasible, to the effect the proposed legislation may have upon the
legislator’s constituents.
If advice is needed on what aspects of the legislation can most successfully be lobbied, or
what kind of information is most needed by the legislators, it is useful to talk to the staff
of the League of California Cities, of the Legislature’s Committees, or of the individual
legislators. The Manager’s Office can provide contact names and phone numbers.
ATTACHED:
Exhibit 1: Sample Federal Letter
Exhibit 2: Sample State Letter
Procedure for City Council meetings with other elected representatives
Typically, the Council meets annually with its County, State and Federal representatives. These
meetings are an important component of building legislative relationships and to share issues of
importance to Palo Alto. These meetings should be scheduled at the appropriate times during the
respective legislative calendars.
At direction of Council, the other Elected Representative, or the City Manager, staff will
schedule a meeting with the representative
The City Manager will seek agenda items from the Mayor and Council
11
Staff from the City Manager’s Office will obtain agenda items from Departments and
staff in the representative’s office
Agenda for the meeting and a potential list of topics will be published by City Clerk
Federal Legislative Timeline
February: Appropriation applications due to Congressional offices
March: National League of Cities Conference
City meetings with Congressional Representative
April/May/June: Tour of project areas with Congressional staff
Letters of support from Mayor and Council
June to September: Track appropriations requests
California State Legislative Timeline 2009
Jan. 1 Statutes take effect
Jan. 5 Legislature reconvenes
Jan. 10 Budget must be submitted by Governor
Jan. 30 Last day to submit bill requests to the Office of Legislative Counsel
Feb. 27 Last day for bills to be introduced
Apr. 2 Spring Recess begins at end of this day’s session
Apr. 13 Legislature reconvenes from Spring Recess
May 1 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to Fiscal
Committees fiscal bills introduced in their house
May 15 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to the Floor non-fiscal bills introduced
in their house
May 22 Last day for policy committees to meet prior to June date
May 29 Last day for fiscal committees to hear and report to the Floor bills introduced in their
house (J.R. 61 (a)(5)). Last day for fiscal committees to meet prior to June 8 (J.R. 61 (a)(6)).
June 1 – 5 Floor Session only. No committee may meet for any purpose
June 5 Last day for bills to be passed out of the house of origin
June 8 Committee meetings may resume
June 15 Budget must be passed by midnight
July 10 Last day for policy committees to meet and report bills
July 17 Summer Recess begins at the end of this day’s session, provided Budget has been
enacted
Aug. 17 Legislature reconvenes from Summer Recess
Aug. 28 Last day for fiscal committees to meet and report bills to the Floor
Aug. 31 – Sept. 11 Floor Session only. No committees, other than conference committees and
Rules Committee, may meet for any purpose
Sept. 4 Last day to amend bills on the Floor
Sept. 11 Last day for each house to pass bills
Interim Study Recess begins at end of this day’s session
12
Oct. 11 Last day for Governor to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature on or before Sept.
11 and in the Governor’s possession after Sept. 11
City Council Timeline
Councilmembers and staff are encouraged to attend Federal and State legislative days as
scheduled throughout the year. Below is a timeline for Council review of the legislative program.
November/ Policy & Services Committee reviews past year’s legislative action
December program
January Staff Report or Study Session reviewing Legislative Program and Manual along
with Utilities Legislative Priorities after Council Retreat
February Review of Federal Appropriations Submittals through staff report
March Council trip to Washington D.C.
June Staff Report Update on status of Appropriations
September Staff Report Update on status of Legislative Program
13
Exhibit 1: Sample Federal Letter
April 27, 2009
The Honorable Anna Eshoo
Member of Congress
205 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Re: City of Palo Alto – Transportation Reauthorization Priorities
Dear Congresswoman Eshoo:
On behalf of the City of Palo Alto, I would like to thank you for your assistance in helping us
meet the transportation needs of our community. It is my understanding that Congress is in
the initial stages of considering legislation to reauthorize the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (SAFETEA-LU). To this end, I write
in full support of the City of Palo Alto’s top two priorities for the transportation
reauthorization bill: (1) the Charleston Corridor Safety Improvement Project and (2)
Highway 101 Pedestrian and Bicycle Overcrossing/Undercrossing.
Charleston Corridor Safety Improvement Project
Charleston Road is a four-lane undivided arterial roadway which carries 15,000 vehicles
daily. The corridor serves eleven schools and numerous residential neighborhoods as well as
major employment centers including the Stanford Research Park and San Antonio /Bayshore
area. The City Council authorized staff to prepare a corridor plan in 2003, approved initiation
of a striping trial of the improvements in 2006 and authorized staff to seek funding for the
implementation of the permanent traffic safety and streetscape improvements in 2008. The
project will:
Maintain existing travel time on the corridor to minimize diversion to other
residential streets; reduce accidents on the corridor;
Improve conditions for pedestrian and bicycle travel;
Improve the quality of life on the corridor; and
Enhance visual amenities along the corridor.
Specifically, federal funding will be used to design and construct the permanent traffic safety
and streetscape improvements along the 1.3 mile segment of Charleston Road between
Fabian Avenue and El Camino Real (State Highway 82) in Palo Alto. The project includes
both small and large scale improvements such as curb ramps, curb and gutter, sidewalks and
asphalt overlay within the public right-of-way to provide safety, and aesthetic improvements.
The improvements will primarily focus on enhancing conditions for pedestrian and bicycle
travel given the high volume of school commute traffic in the area, as well as traffic calming
to make the corridor more livable for residents and reduce impacts on the environment
caused by congestion.
14
The Charleston Corridor Safety Improvement Project is estimated to cost $5,711,000.
A breakdown of the financing plan for the project is outlined below:
City Traffic Impact Fees $700,000
City Capital Improvement Program $400,000
State TDA Article 3 Funds $200,000
Federal contribution (77%) $4,411,000
Highway 101 Pedestrian and Bicycle Overcrossing/Undercrossing Project
Currently, the only year-round alternative to a new grade separated bicycle/pedestrian
crossing of Highway 101 is the existing San Antonio Road interchange at Highway 101.
This is a very high speed overcrossing that is not suitable for pedestrian and bicycle travel.
Only the most expert bicyclists would consider using it; average cyclists, families, children
would not. The Highway 101 Pedestrian and Bicycle Overcrossing/Undercrossing project
will provide a safe, reliable pedestrian and bicycle overpass/underpass to the frontage roads
east and west of the freeway. The project is identified in the Santa Clara Valley
Transportation Authority 2035 plan list of countywide priority bicycle projects and will
provide a connection to the San Francisco Bay Trail as well as access to regional
employment and recreation areas.
Specifically, the federal funds will be used to conduct a feasibility study, conceptual design,
and environmental study for the construction of a new pedestrian/bicycle grade separated
crossing of Highway 101 in Palo Alto to provide connectivity from residential and
commercial areas in south Palo Alto to the Palo Alto Baylands Nature Preserve, Shoreline
and East Bayshore business parks, and the regional Bay Trail network of 240 bike trails
along the San Francisco Bay shoreline. The project will be located in Palo Alto in the
Highway 101 corridor north of the San Antonio Road interchange.
The Highway 101 Pedestrian and Bicycle Overcrossing/Undercrossing project is
estimated to cost $6,048,000. A breakdown of the financing plan for the project is
outlined below:
City General Fund & VTA Bicycle Expenditure Program
$1,200,000
Federal Contribution (80%)
$4,848,000
The City has engaged in a public participation process by creating a stakeholder working
group for Charleston Corridor Safety Improvement Project. This group includes members of
the local neighborhood associations, school representatives, and other stakeholders. If the
City acquires federal funding for the project, staff will continue to work with the working
group. Additionally, staff will hold several public meetings to provide an opportunity for
comment. Furthermore, the City Council’s Architectural Review Board, an advisory
committee, will review the project. With respect to the Highway 101 Pedestrian and Bicycle
Overcrossing/Undercrossing Project, this is a priority for City’s Parks and Recreation
Commission and a subcommittee is working with the Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee
to ensure stakeholder input. The Commission will discuss this project at future meetings
15
which require public notice. Finally, the City Council will approve any scope of service or
contract for these projects. The public will have an opportunity to provide comment at each
of these public meetings.
Again, thank you for your continued support of our community. We look forward to
working with you and your staff as the transportation reauthorization bill moves through the
legislative process.
Sincerely,
Peter Drekmeier
Mayor
c. Palo Alto City Councilmembers
Jim Keene, City Manager
16
Exhibit 2: Sample State Letter
February 26, 2009
Honorable Joe Simitian
11th District
State Capitol, Room 2080
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Senator Simitian:
The City of Palo Alto strongly supports Senate Bill 346 by Senator Kehoe which would
restrict the use of copper and other toxic materials in vehicle brake pads. Copper is toxic to
phytoplankton, the base of the aquatic food chain, and has been shown to adversely impact
salmon sensory organs, potentially compromising their ability to return to spawning streams
and avoid predators.
Palo Alto and other local governments are required by National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permits to control copper discharges to creeks, estuaries and
the ocean. Brake pads are the largest single source of copper to waterways and have been
estimated to contribute as much as 35% of the copper reaching San Francisco Bay. Local
governments are not able to effectively control brake dust and legislative action is the only
viable alternative.
Palo Alto staff initiated the Brake Pad Partnership, a collaborative group of government staff,
brake pad manufacturers and environmentalists, to work out a solution to the brake pad issue.
The problem has been studied, quantified, and the participants all now agree that an orderly
phase-out of copper is in everyone’s best interest. Brake pad manufacturers support
legislative requirements because, without them, less responsible manufacturers could
continue to sell high copper brake pads in California. Environmentalists are supporting a
legislative approach because of impacts of copper on ecosystems, and because the bill would
also address lead and asbestos, which still appear in brake pads, sold by less responsible
manufacturers.
We anticipate that Senate Bill 346 will come before your Environmental Quality Committee
and encourage your support and leadership. Controlling this key source of copper is of
critical importance and represents the culmination of hard work by Palo Alto staff and others.
Phil Bobel our Manager of Environmental Compliance within the City’s Public Works
Department would like to meet with you. It would be our preference to meet with you in Palo
Alto. He will be in touch with your office to schedule a meeting. Thank you for your
energetic leadership on so many important environmental issues such as this bill.
Sincerely,
Peter Drekmeier
Mayor
c. Palo Alto Councilmembers
James Keene, City Manager
05/12/09 P&S:1
POLICY AND SERVICES COMMITTEE
Regular Meeting
May 12, 2009
The Policy & Services Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the
Council Conference Room at 7:03 p.m.
Present: Barton, Espinosa (Chair), Kishimoto, Yeh
1. Oral Communications
None
2. Recommendation for Council Approval of the City’s Legislative Action
Program Manual
Assistant to the City Manager, Kelly Morariu, presented information on the
City’s Legislative Action Program Manual. She cited five important goals for the
evening:
1) Review of the suggested Federal and State Advocacy Objectives.
2) Defining Council’s role in the legislative process.
3) Getting comments from the Committee on the Legislative Action Manual.
4) Review of the Priority Development process for the legislative program.
5) Overall guiding principles presented to the Council on a revisit toward any
additional changes, followed by a write-up on the Federal Appropriation
requests.
She stated the City’s legislative strategy was comprised of three levels which
included Federal, State and Regional. Council’s roles and goals were cited as
protecting the City’s interests as well as advancement of City interests. Staff
noted the importance of the City’s active role in the legislature. She discussed
the primary goal in the Federal legislative efforts as involved with fund
securement for City projects through the appropriations process. At the State
level, the focus was on issue advocacy in the State legislature. She posed the
question as to whether these were the only roles the City should play in
advocacy or whether additional roles should be considered.
05/12/09 P&S:2
The Legislation Action Manual outlines Council’s historical role in the process
which included:
1) Establishment of legislative priorities.
2) Position-taking in Sacramento and Washington, DC regarding legislative
issues.
3) Assumption of an advocacy role with the legislators at the Federal and State
levels.
Ms. Morariu stated that areas that needed further discussion include the future
roles of the Council in the legislative process.
Recreation Supervisor, Khashayar Alaee, spoke on the current Legislative Action
Manual that outlines the internal coordination of the Legislative Action Program,
defined the roles for Council, departments and Staff and provided clarity on the
specific responsibilities. He stated the manual also provided guidelines for
evaluating legislation, lobbying methods and letter-writing activities, with an
outline on the Federal, State and City legislative timelines and process. Staff’s
goal was around the overall guiding principles from the previous year with
priorities generated by Council and Staff to be brought forth on an annual basis.
He noted discussion would occur with Policy and Services with a referral to
Council for adoption prior to opening of the Federal Legislative year. He
summarized the guiding principles adopted by the Council in December 2009
as:
1) Protection of local revenue sources.
2) Protection and increase of local government discretion.
3) Protection and increase of funding for specific programs and services.
He noted recent activities in Appropriations and the Stimulus Package,
continued work done by Congresswoman Eschoo and the submission of Federal
Appropriations materials. He spoke on a handout regarding Palo Alto’s
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act projects. He stressed the daily
changes made to the country’s Stimulus Package and noted to date the receipt
of funding for four projects for direct Federal Allocations in Transportation,
Housing and Urban Development, Department of Energy and Efficiency and the
Department of Justice.
Council Member Kishimoto asked if these were above and beyond what had
previously expected in grant funding.
Mr. Alaee stated this was above and beyond any prior allocations. He outlined
the potential list of projects brought to Council, who had approved this list, and
also included Staff’s analysis of the legislation in order to identify continued
05/12/09 P&S:3
opportunities. Five projects were identified as worth pursuit which included
projects in:
1) The Department of Commerce for Fiber to the Home.
2) The Utilities Department and Environmental Protection Agency for Clean
water and the Water Saver Volume Loan Fund.
3) The Police Department and the Department of Justice for community-
oriented police services grants.
4) A second pursuit by the Utilities Department through the Clean Water Saver
Volume Loan Fund for the recycled water project at Stanford Research Park.
5) The Fire Department and Homeland Security for assistance and grants in
firefighting programs and to assist with new fire station construction.
He stated Staff had all but completed their analysis and applications for
available grant opportunities, but would continue to receive and distribute the
information regarding ongoing changes in the Stimulus Program. He noted the
creation of the website www.cityofpaloalto.org/recovery with daily and weekly
updates.
Chair Espinosa stated cities do a good job at the local level but activity at the
Federal level was usually in pursuit of additional funding. He stressed looking
at the role Staff and Council might take in the future to increase their funding
goal pursuits. He stated there was also a Request for Proposal (RFP) out there
for a Federal lobbying group. The City released the RFP in reconsideration of the
lobbying group in Washington, DC. He stressed this was a time for the City and
the Council to step back and look at what necessary goals were in DC. At the
State level, there were also concerns for the City and it is necessary for the City
to be more vocal regarding interest. Organizations at the Regional level also
have impact and the City has activity on several boards. However, the City
could be more active with other organizations.
Council Member Barton agreed with the above-mentioned general points but
specifically noted the need for Federal and State lobbyists. He suggested
looking at comparable cities in order to pair up and increase the City’s lobbying
efforts. He stressed the need for ongoing efforts in looking at what more Staff
and Council can do in terms of ramping-up lobbying efforts. He stated Council
and Staff had a lot to do on a daily basis, but also stressed the value of having
Council members in Sacramento and Washington for lobbying on issues.
Council Member Kishimoto was appreciative of the direction and comments
made thus far. She noted a recent gap in the high-speed rail area and the
need for a lobbyist on this issue. She stressed the importance of lobbying as
well in the environmental and Fiber to the Home arenas at the State and
Federal levels.
05/12/09 P&S:4
Council Member Yeh asked for clarification on the grant amounts from the
Department of Justice for what appeared to be a one-police-officer position. He
asked if there were other pieces to this.
Ms. Morariu stated staff would follow-up on this.
Council Member Yeh clarified that information would be available online on the
Recovery website for public transparency. He asked if the annual meetings
with legislators could be built into the Legislative Action Program Manual. He
cited instances where it would be helpful to have a Council member and a
lobbyist present for important issues and perspectives. He asked if issue
advocacy could be added as a role on the Federal lobbying level due to various
issues that did not necessarily deal solely with funding.
Council Member Kishimoto reinforced the need for both lobbyist and Council
presence on key issues in order to provide a broad perspective. This dealt with
their discussions on the Overall Guiding Principles. However, she suggested
reference as to how this affected Council priorities.
Council Member Yeh suggested work on how to rephrase the reference to the
Guiding Principles in order to take into account the balance of the Regional and
local work and any conflict with Council priorities.
Council Member Barton agreed with the importance of dollar acquisition at the
Federal level.
Chair Espinosa suggested inclusion of the language from the Request for
Proposal (RFP) since this would more fully cover proposed goals at the Federal
level.
Ms. Morariu asked if he had any particular wording in mind.
Chair Espinosa suggested calling all three, the Federal, State and Regional.
Council Member Kishimoto stated one example of the Regional concerns as SB-
375 and its implementation over the next several years.
Chair Espinosa suggested laying out in the document what the process would
look like if there was a controversial issue and how this would be dealt with
organizationally.
Ms. Morariu asked if there was further specific language from the RFP or scope
of services that should be included.
05/12/09 P&S:5
Chair Espinosa suggested pulling out the analysis and goal setting language to
flesh out the higher level work that needed to be done.
Council Member Kishimoto suggested thinking proactively in order to get an
understanding of the major legislative items at the Federal level and what is on
the horizon that the City needed to follow.
Chair Espinosa asked if a lobbyist was something that the Committee would
likely recommend or would Council or Staff consider hiring a lobbyist on the
State level. He stressed a process was needed around this in order to delineate
how Staff looked at filling this need on a full-time contracted basis or in some
other form.
Council Member Barton stated hiring a lobbyist was not the most functional
approach on an issue-by-issue basis. He stated things moved so fast
legislatively that it was important to keep a lobbyist on board full-time.
Chair Espinosa asked if a full-time employed lobbyist made sense.
Council Member Barton suggested experimenting with a full-time lobbyist and
the costs of this. He stated a lobbyist was not hired specifically to work for Palo
Alto, but was hired more for what existed in their lobbying portfolio to which
their work would be beneficial to the City.
Ms. Morariu stated the City had a State lobbyist in the past and this was
discontinued.
Mr. Alaee stated the lobbyist was discontinued as part of a Budget cut after the
dot.com bust in 2001.
Ms. Morariu stated she had discussed this issue with the City Manager, based
on Council’s prior discussion. His experience was that a Federal lobbyist was
the more effective choice versus a general State lobbyist. State lobbyists were
typically hired on an issue by issue basis.
Council Member Barton stressed another reason to experiment with the State
lobbyist option was for further leveraging on issues in view of the City
Manager’s past experiences.
Council Member Yeh stated Utilities had a lobbyist who was not technically on-
contract with the City, but was available for pro bono work. He maintained an
in-depth focus on the Utilities’ issues to date. He noted this level of specificity
was beneficial for the City in regard to utility issues.
05/12/09 P&S:6
Chair Espinosa suggested a future discussion with the City Manager, given his
level of expertise on this, might be helpful in the different approaches at the
State level for funding, high-speed rail, environmental and additional issues.
He stressed the importance of having the right type of structure at the State,
Federal and Regional levels. He asked what this looked like at the Regional
level when deciding upon organizations or the different types of representation
the City needed for regional bodies.
Council Member Barton stated that, on a Regional level, it would be on an
issue-by-issue basis. He gave the example of high-speed rail where the issue
was crafted as it progressed rather than through reliance on existing lobbying
groups. He noted the lobbying work lay in trying to figure out which were
Federal and/or State issues at the core level.
Council Member Kishimoto noted lobbying logistics for Fiber to the Home
involved the same type of work in progress.
Chair Espinosa suggested their goal was to carve out how the City is already
engaged, to see where the Federal government lobbying structure is going, and
then a conversation as well about work at the State level. He noted the
importance to segment these areas out identifying the necessary steps for more
transparent view of the City’s lobbying goals and efforts.
Council Member Yeh suggested a map of the existing Sacramento lobbyists, the
DC lobbyists and then the ability to see the existing regional organizations thus
far. He also agreed it was important to link with other cities and groups toward
common lobbying goals as a proactive approach.
Council Member Barton stressed these groups were both reactive and proactive
in their work.
Chair Espinosa suggested they move on to a discussion of Council’s role in the
legislative process. He stressed the importance of clearly identifying Council’s
roles in Study Sessions, potential issues, and how Council can aid the lobbying
efforts. He was also interested in seeing roles more clearly delineated as to
who really takes the lead at the State and Federal levels.
Ms. Morariu stated they also talked about creating, during the legislative
season, a standing agenda item which could be brought to Council regarding
pending legislative issues. She stressed their ongoing efforts to ensure
Council’s engagement and awareness of the pending issues.
05/12/09 P&S:7
Chair Espinosa agreed this ongoing dialogue and visibility of needs on the
lobbying front was important on many levels.
Council Member Kishimoto noted the important role the League of California
Cities plays as sort of a rapid response team to keep the City and Council
abreast of issues. She stated the League was a great resource to the City and
Council.
Ms. Morariu stated the League had legislative analysts and grass-root board
coordinators on legislative issues.
Chair Espinosa noted the importance of talking with the City Manager about
how to engage with these above-noted organizations to move forward on Palo
Alto legislative issues.
Council Member Kishimoto agreed, and noted the City had not yet been as
proactive in this engagement arena with these leagues and groups.
Council Member Yeh noted Council’s role as delineated in the manual was that
they do the groundwork for the City’s legislative strategies in setting the
Council Priorities. He saw the Council’s Priorities as very proactive statement
over a one- to two-year period. He was curious as to how the Comprehensive
Plan can outlive Council tenures, and whether or not this should be factored
into the reworking of legislative priorities or whether they remain locked into
the current Council and its priorities.
Council Member Barton stated the Comprehensive Plan had no engagement at
the Federal Level, realistically.
Mr. Alaee stated Staff’s intent was to develop some Overall Guiding Principles
for the legislative year beginning in December, which would come close to the
Council’s retreat schedule, if not actually being part of this retreat. He stated
that if Council’s priorities had changed, the legislative priorities would be there
at the retreat or at the next Council meeting in order to readjust and align
priorities as they moved forward, keeping in mind the current Council’s
priorities for that particular year.
Council Member Kishimoto stated the current wording noted the process in
which a City Council member brings up an issue, which included Colleague’s
Memos. She stated this process takes a length of time.
Ms. Morariu noted the Legislative Manual was definitely a work in progress.
She stated there were certainly time sensitivities of suggested processes that
were not taken into account, but noted that many of the manual guides were
05/12/09 P&S:8
more specific to longer term legislative issues as opposed to more pressing
immediate issues moving through Council.
Council Member Kishimoto noted many items would be coming to Council in the
very first place by usual process, which did not require a bulleted placeholder in
the guide towards legislation. She reiterated that if an issue is brought to
Council, if it is an issue that is outside of the box, then Staff had the authority
to send a letter in any legislative case.
Mr. Alaee verified the wording that would be removed in order to more
concisely define the process in Council for controversial topics.
Chair Espinosa noted budget issues in which the previous City Manager had cut
the lobbyist. He stated there was tension over Council members’ participation
and the costs associated with attending lobbying sessions in their advocacy
roles. He asked if there was a way to include language that would prioritize
outside funding for these trips, and if funding can be found outside the City of
Palo Alto resources that would allow and pay for Council members’ participation
in lobbying efforts.
Council Member Yeh agreed that the City underwent scrutiny in situations such
as this where City funds are spent for these trips and lobbying. At the Federal,
State and Regional levels, he suggested a built-in transparency around the
financial aspects of Council’s engagement in lobbying efforts and travel that
might include recommendations to go through associations which might cover
these activities. He stressed transparency over the City’s budget for these
lobbying activities were absolutely necessary.
Chair Espinosa understood the approach towards this transparency but also
noted the danger of large companies or corporations paying for these trips
which may also send the wrong message to the public. He suggested wording
to the point that the Council’s actions and expenditures needed to be consistent
with the value of the issue at hand including the tradition the City holds in
monitoring this type of spending and the number of Council members who take
part in the activities and travel for any one event.
Council Member Kishimoto suggested looking at how other cities handle this
travel and these expenditures effectively. She also suggested Palo Alto may
want to develop a strategic plan in this particular area.
Chair Espinosa stated since they were coming back for one more discussion
over issues at the Sacramento level, and how that looks for the City, that they
might benefit hearing from an expert in the field for a sense of what the best
practice looked like in this particular arena. He stressed this would flesh things
05/12/09 P&S:9
out more thoroughly on the financial and legislative side of the issue of
Council’s involvement and how to best handle this. He noted a model for this
lobbyist activity was necessary.
Council Member Barton spoke to the model for the Green Building Ordinance
and suggested they could go to the state and point out this is how everyone
should do it and/or the better alternative which was to be completely open
about the ordinance and modeling their success for others to use. He noted
there were a number of areas where the City was on the cutting-edge of issues
and could help other cities to join in.
Chair Espinosa noted they were speaking about legislative agendas and moving
certain legislations, and asked how his modeling suggestion and example
related to this.
Council Member Barton gave the example that if many cities adopted the same
Green Building Ordinance or a similar version, this would be consistent with
many of the City’s generalized goals. He also felt, if the City were out there
proactively, this put them at the head of the class on additional topics. In this
case, when they arrive in Sacramento, they are known and understood as to
what they stand for and are willing to fight for.
Chair Espinosa noted it was key to have the City spotlight its ongoing best
practices.
Council Member Barton cited this as the City basically striving to always be the
best role model.
Council Member Kishimoto returned to her original comment about looking
through the lens of asking about Federal and State legislative issues and
priorities and where Council fits in.
Mr. Alaee cited staff report CMR:241-09, page 11, as a place where there were
several bullet points on procedures for the City Council and other elected
representatives and their roles. He asked if these bullets needed to be fleshed
out further or provided the appropriate perspective on those roles.
Council Member Yeh asked if this was essentially with regard to Council
members and representatives.
Mr. Alaee stated it involved supervisors, representatives and any other elected
representatives as well.
05/12/09 P&S:10
Council Member Barton noted one item not included in the bullets was a
scheduling of these activities at the appropriate times along the legislative
timeline.
Chair Espinosa stated it was a great start but held issue with the fact that it
focused more on process. He looked for more information on the Council’s
specific roles at all the levels of engagement. He noted what existed in the
manual thus far was more with regard to Staff’s timing with a small paragraph
on the Council’s role. He wished to see more language with regard to Council’s
role.
Council Member Barton stated Council’s role, in many cases, was dependent
upon the larger decision of whether they have a lobbyist or no lobbyist at the
State level. In choosing to have a lobbyist, those directions would be given.
Chair Espinosa stated this was true as well in the conversations they would be
having with the Federal lobbyists as well. He stated these conversations were
well-dictated, but he stated there was also need for Council’s role in order to
have something that really spoke to their legislative strategy.
Council Member Barton stated some might argue that these roles would vary
issue-by-issue. He was not sure there was a generalized approach or process
available.
Chair Espinosa reiterated there was some process for the most part in order to
guide Council, and this needed to be fleshed out further.
Council Member Yeh stated there needed to be more clear delineation or
diagrams in the manual with regard to potential City Council or member
interactions with the legislative body, but these were not necessarily clearly
delineated in the diagram as to how this progresses. He asked if it was through
the City Manager’s office, and if it was, then was this the lobbying or getting in
touch with the legislative bodies. He was looking for more clarity on these
arrows and bullets.
Ms. Morariu reiterated that he was looking for the direct link between the
Council and its activities with the legislative body.
Chair Espinosa stated it was a good model for Staff in talking about how they
would ideally have the legislation come in. Although the reality was, this was
not really a flowchart in that legislative issues and proposals for legislation can
come in from many directions. If this was meant to be a flowchart of the
process for work, it needed further discussion about what is entailed in each
step along the way.
05/12/09 P&S:11
Council Member Barton stated it might work best on two charts, one where
there is a reaction to the legislation and a second where there is support,
drafting or sponsorship of the legislation.
Chair Espinosa noted a third category that would include dollars donated toward
that end. He asked if there were any concerns or thoughts on the Priority
Development Process.
Ms. Morariu offered, by way of context, that this was meant to go with the
legislative schedule.
Chair Espinosa agreed the calendars were helpful but suggested this was
definitely an area where they need to make sure they hear input from the
lobbyists in DC and Sacramento and possibly checking in on the regional level
as well to really make sure the timelines were appropriate.
Council Member Barton, on Protecting the City’s Interests, was inclined to
remove additional wording.
Council Member Barton noted this was particularly important. He stressed if
the legislature passed an Ordinance, for example, banning polystyrene for
every City, this took away the City’s discretion but was consistent with the City
goals. He noted, for this reason, that discretion and goals were two completely
different concepts.
Mr. Alaee noted this wording was not directly from the League, but was drawn
from historical items Staff found. He suggested looking to the League for
similar language.
Ms. Morariu suggested wording that was consistent with other Council priorities.
Council Member Barton suggested the wording “to retain or increase but
generally not decrease the amount of local discretion.”
Council Member Kishimoto stated the City wanted their discretion to be over
any State standards.
Council Member Yeh was supportive of that general approach. He stated
wording alluding to never was extremely definitive and they wanted to be
careful about that.
Chair Espinosa asked if there were other bullets that needed alternative
wording.
05/12/09 P&S:12
Council Member Barton noted with regard to the Overall Guiding Principles the
wording “seeking new and alternative funding” was more appropriate.
Council Member Kishimoto suggested the wording “protect and increase
government discretion” in balance with City values. She also suggested
wording “to retain the right to exceed State standards.”
Chair Espinosa did not have concerns about the prior wording. However, he
was not sure that the wording captured everything that the City does in the
legislative process.
Ms. Morariu suggested “proactively advocate on behalf of the City” which was
more proactive wording.
Chair Espinosa noted also an item that was missing with regard to advocacy,
general issue areas, or as maybe taking off some of the pressure at the Federal
and State level because of the work done at the Regional level.
Council Member Barton suggested wording toward being proactive in the
legislature in that they were not just reacting by acting or sponsoring
legislation, as an example. He noted guidelines more in keeping with reacting
to legislation and he sought wording of a more proactive nature.
Council Member Kishimoto, on page 1 of Attachment A, outlined specifics of a
proactive nature.
Chair Espinosa noted the same wording could be used to capture this proactive
nature in the Guiding Principles.
Council Member Kishimoto stated every year’s guidelines needed to define the
areas worth monitoring proactively. She noted they may not sponsor the
legislation but were paying attention to high-profile issues such as high-speed
rail as an example.
Mr. Alaee asked if on their return meetings it would help if they brought back a
list of area cities’ over-riding principles in comparison.
Chair Espinosa stated it was helpful to hear the best practices while working on
this more proactive agenda in their guiding principles. He asked if there were
any other concerns over the guiding principles and found none. He moved the
meeting toward discussion of the Priority Development and Guiding Principles.
He thought, in terms of the priorities, as well as the guiding principles, that it
was important to separate out the three areas they were working on since there
05/12/09 P&S:13
were very different approaches at the Federal, State and Regional levels in
priority and process.
Council Member Yeh requested further information regarding organizations on
which Council members serve on a regular basis. He suggested a check-in
point to note Council’s priorities at the Regional level. He noted this would
ensure the public understands of Council’s ongoing roles beyond the City in
other advocacy areas.
Chair Espinosa stated it was important to look at area cost and benefit models
as well for work done at the Regional level on up. He asked if there were any
further particular directives going forward. He summarized the key points of
their discussion as:
1) Looking at the best practices and approaches at all legislative levels.
2) Best practices and area models.
3) Wording and more specific changes to the memo.
Item continued to meeting on June 17, 2009.
3. Discussion for Future Meeting Schedules and Agendas.
Timing was discussed for the future meetings, possible meeting dates, as well
as their content and the possibility of having noted speakers provide
information on effective lobbying.
Next meeting scheduled for June 17, 2009
ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
Policy & Services Committee Meeting
July 15, 2009
Attachment C: List of Regional Agencies
Metropolitan Transportation Agency (MTC)
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
Santa Clara County Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)
League of CA Cities Peninsula Division
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA)
Northern California Power Agency (NCPA)
California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA)
Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission
Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Council
Santa Clara County Cities Association
Santa Clara County Valley Water Commission
Santa Clara County Valley Water District
Peninsula Gateway Study Committee
San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority
Transmission Agency of Northern California