Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 12344 City of Palo Alto (ID # 12344) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 6/22/2021 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Legislative Advocacy Title: Review of the Policy & Services Committee's Recommendation on State Legislative Advocacy, Discussion and Direction on Potential Alterations to the City's State Legislative Advocacy Program, and Related Actions From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council review the Policy and Services Committee Recommendation on State legislative advocacy (see below), discuss and provide direction on potential alterations to the City’s State legislative advocacy program, and make additional related motions as needed. Background The City has been growing its legislative advocacy program at the State level for some years now and it has resulted in Palo Alto being able to represent itself and speak out on issues of interest to the community while also advancing various City priorities. At the May 11, 2021 Policy and Services Committee meeting, the Committee took the following action as part of the legislative update item (CMR # 12269): To recommend [that] the City Council approve the action on the following pending State and Federal bills or policy: A. Direct Townsend Public Affairs to group the proposed legislative bills that fit within the City of Palo Alto’s legislative guidelines, the City of Palo Alto’s Resolution 9942 (which preserves local control and democracy), and those that would need City Council action in order to take a position; and B. Return to the Policy and Services Committee with other city models that contain a legislative committee and more oversight of proposed legislation, such as those in the City of Lafayette and the City of Cupertino. This item is coming to the full City Council for further discussion and guidance. Discussion City of Palo Alto Page 2 The Policy and Services Committee asked questions which related back to the core question of how Palo Alto wants to present itself in its legislative strategy in Sacramento and what does the City seek to accomplish within the State Capitol. The Committee asked for analysis about the 2,800 bills proposed this legislation session and about what is the best strategy to stay aware of the bills and to make Palo Alto’s voice heard in the most effective way. While the principle of local control could be interpreted broadly to encompass many mandates, its application to specific bills are judgment calls. Based on these questions, staff has prepared information below to provide the full City Council with additional material to help address those questions. The information is organized in the following way: A. Strategy Options to Consider B. Format for Local Legislative Review and Requests to Weigh in on Bills and Other Priorities C. Follow up Information Requested by the Policy and Services Committee C. Strategy Options to Consider: Staff has come up with three possible legislative tracks for the City Council to consider when thinking about the overall Legislative Strategy for State legislative advocacy on behalf of the City: 1. Widespread Weighing in on Legislation: In this strategy, the City would comment on many bills proposed regardless of the author, the likelihood of passage, or the impact on Palo Alto specifically. In this strategy, Palo Alto would have more presence in Sacramento but could be seen as “papering the capital” which at times could lower the City’s impact/voice. This is especially true if the City uses templated form letters from advocacy groups or the League. a. Resources Required: This approach is time intensive with a lower level of impact for the City. It will require the City Council or a subgroup thereof the City Council to meet frequently, especially in Jan-Mar each year, to review all bills and consider taking a position. Also requires staff time to notice meetings, gather materials, meet more frequently with consultants, etc. Likely would need a dedicated staff member to stay on top of all the issues. This approach does not necessarily build partnerships for the City or advance major legislative and administrative goals. 2. Advocate on a limited number of issues: In this strategy, the City only work on strategic initiatives, including Capitol visits and efforts to advance major City goals, such as grade separation and climate action. In this strategy, the City would miss the opportunity to opine on issues of the day through bills sponsored in session, but it would force Palo Alto to focus on the major priorities that the City has in relation to the State government, including funding. a. Resources Required: This approach can be managed with existing staff and the existing City Council committee structure. The Policy and Services Committee members and/or the Chair and the Mayor can be the City’s representatives to City of Palo Alto Page 3 personally advocate on behalf of the City on a limited number of issues of high importance to Palo Alto. In this approach, the City would not be participating in the broader legislative experience. 3. Strategic Weighing in on Issues of Interest to the City: In this strategy, the City would lean heavily on the categories identified in the legislative guidelines. The City would thoughtfully comment on a handful of bills to ensure that Palo Alto had presence in Sacramento with meaningful contributions for or against a limited number of bills of interest while simultaneously working on other strategic initiatives outside of legislation that are important to the City (such as grade separation funding). With respect to draft bills, this strategy would focus on bills that directly impact Palo Alto and have a fair or high likelihood of passage. a. Resources Required: This approach can be managed with existing staff and the existing City Council structure. The Policy and Services Committee members and/or the Chair and the Mayor can be the City’s representatives to personally advocate on behalf of the City on a limited number of issues of importance to the Palo Alto. To offer meaningful feedback on bills of interest, this approach requires attention from other City departments such as the Police Department and the Planning and Development Services Department. The point in weighing in on bills in this approach is to show policy understanding, thought, and ideas to improve legislation as opposed to more general letters as described in option #1 above. The Policy and Services Committee could discuss legislation monthly and bring any recommendations to the City Council for action in this model while also maintaining focus on the City’s priorities. Overall, letters sent to legislators in Sacramento are important, but they are just a starting point for engagement. For things on which the City wants to have an impact, any letter submitted should be accompanied by active advocacy from both the City Council and the legislative advocate firm. On average, when an elected official shows up, it means more, and the legislators listen. Staff recommends Strategy Option #3 and was working towards that in 2019 before the pandemic slowed things down significantly in 2020. D. Format for Local Legislative Review and Requests to Weigh in on Bills and Other Priorities Depending on which option most interests the City Council, there may be a need to consider a different configuration of the City Council to review bills and to recommend whether to weigh in. Currently, the full City Council adopts the legislative guidelines at the beginning of the year at the latest. Then staff and the legislative advocates use the guidelines as an outline for the types of legislation to watch. If bills have a potentially high impact on Palo Alto and have a high likelihood to keep moving through the legislature and links to the legislative guidelines, then staff and the legislative advocates would consider asking the Mayor to sign a letter. Also, when the Mayor or a Councilmember shares a bill of interest with staff, staff reviews the bill in City of Palo Alto Page 4 relation to the legislative guidelines and assesses the impact of the bill on Palo Alto through conversations with expert departmental staff members. If the bills requested for letter submission do not clearly link to the guidelines, are controversial, or have a low impact on Palo Alto, staff would recommend the Policy and Services Committee and/or full City Council weigh in on those potential letters. The Policy and Services Committee asked staff to look at some alternative models for City Council to consider if the City Council chose something like Option 1 above with advocating more frequently on more bills in Sacramento. Staff gathered a few examples as shown in the table below: Short Sampling of City Council Configurations for Legislative Advocacy: City Council Structure for Legislation Types of Analysis Done Notes Lafayette, CA and Cupertino, CA Standing Legislative Committee of 2 (of 5) Council Members; meets every 6 weeks They review all bills with the legislative advocate consultant and narrow the number of bills that then they do a deeper analysis on. This analysis helps the committee decide whether or not to weigh in on the bill. The Committee reviews up to 12 bills per committee meeting. This model requires an additional standing committee of the City Council, requires public noticing, additional staff support, and more hours dedicated specifically to legislative advocacy for the City. Mountain View, CA and other nearby cities No standing committee. Legislation is reviewed by staff. When needed, staff will analyze bills of interest and read the Fiscal Analysis from Sacramento. They do not consider weighing in on all bills. n/a Southern CA Consultant Planning Report Analysis done based on: High Likelihood of Passage and High Impact on the community In this structure, they would only weigh in on the bills that were likely moving and had a clear impact on the agency. This significantly helped narrow the number of bills to analyze. This model would be able to work with the existing Policy and Services Committee and could incorporate monthly legislative updates there to accomplish this without setting up a new committee. C. Follow up Information Requested by the Policy and Services Committee The Policy and Services Committee asked for information on the model used by other organizations. That information is shared above. The Committee also asked for an analysis on all bills to understand how many bills fit into the categories of the City’s legislative guidelines as well as the Local Control and Democracy resolution. Given that roughly 2,800 bills were being considered at the time, Townsend Public Affairs staff suggested that the analysis might be more feasible after bills pass their respective Appropriations Committees. According to the analysis conducted by Townsend Public Affairs, the City’s State Legislative Advocates, the following information is available of a more detailed analysis of bills broken down by policy buckets, City of Palo Alto Page 5 before first house Appropriations Committee, and then after first house Appropriations Committees. As discussed at the Policy and Services Committee, the Appropriations Committee in each house is the first major hurdle for bills and it holds (stops) some legislation. It is the first major choke point. Additionally, this year, the leaders in both houses said authors can only have 12 bills go into the second house to ensure adequate time for all bills to be heard this session. This is only due to COVID, its restrictions on the Capitol, the process, and the sheer amount of time it takes to hear routine items. It can be expected to change next year. The six main policy buckets for the City are: 1. Public Safety-Related Bills (27 related bills/23 after first Appropriations Committee) a. There are two significant bills being discussed right now, SB 2 and SB 16, related to police reform. Staff will provide an update on these bills in an at-places memo before the City Council meeting. 2. Environment-Related Bills (23 related bills/19 after first Appropriations Committee) 3. Homelessness-Related Bills (15 related bills/12 after first Appropriations Committee) 4. Housing-Related Bills (39 related bills/34 after first Appropriations Committee) 5. Transportation-Related Bills (18 related bills/15 after first Appropriations Committee) 6. Local Government-Related Bills (7 related bills/6 after first Appropriations Committee) Total number of bills in all buckets before Appropriations: 179 bills Total number of bills in all buckets after Appropriations: 159 bills The bills relating to the Local Control Resolution largely track with the Housing Related or Local Government Related Bills. There are about 20 bills that relate to the Local Control Resolution. Townsend can analyze more bills than they currently analyze still within the scope of their existing contract. However, they cannot do that for 150-180 bills. With the staff recommendation of the Option #3-type of strategy for the City, Townsend’s analysis on bills could be a deeper analysis on around 25 bills instead of the 150-180 range. In Option #3, Townsend would continue to watch other bills and keep the City aware of impact but would not recommend the City to weigh in on and analyze all of these bills. Timeline and Resource Impact The timeline and impact are based on the options chosen.