August 19, 2005
Issue #33-2005
WANT MORE DET AILS
ON BILLS?
Visit the League of
California Cities
website at
www.cacities.org/
billsearch.
FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION ENGAGES IN STRATEGIC
PLANNING PROCESS
• ICMA TO HOLD WEBCAST ON BRAC
ILG RELEASES ‘ETHICS LAW COMPLIANCE BEST PRACTICES’ GUIDE
• W2I DIGITAL CITIES CONVENTION SET FOR OCTOBER, READY TO TAKE
YOUR CITY DIGITAL?
HOUSING RESOURCE CENTER CONTINUES TO EXPAND
BILL SUMMARIES
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Annual Conference,
October 5-8, 2005 -
San Francisco
One year after the League’s outstanding victory winning Proposition 1A on
the statewide ballot, the League of California Cities’ 2005 Annual Conference
is back in San Francisco — for the first time since 1997 — with a theme of
“Stepping it Up.” This is the conference you won’t want to miss – and can’t
afford to miss if you want to join in this effort to raise the level of achievements
for California cities. For more, see Page 6.
STEPPING IT UP!
LEAGUE ANNUAL CONFERENCE SET FOR
OCTOBER 5-8 IN SAN FRANCISCO
The League of California Cities wrote to Sens. Dianne Feinstein and
Barbara Boxer this week, expressing its opposition to S. 1504, the “Broad-
band Investment and Consumer Choice Act.” For more, see Page 4.
LEAGUE EXPRESSES OPPOSITION OF S. 1504
TO FEINSTEIN AND BOXER
The Senate Local Government Committee held an informational hearing
on August 17 to examine how the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City
of New London affects California law. For more, see Page 7.
SENATE HEARING FOCUSES ON EMINENT DOMAINVisit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org
PAGE 2/PRIORITY FOCUS
The state Fair Political Practices Commission
(FPPC) is engaged in a strategic planning pro-
cess, and seeks input and comment from local
officials.
The FPPC is the state agency charged with
enforcing and advising upon the Political Reform
Act, portions of which apply to local officials.
The focus of the FPPC’s new plan appears to
be on improving or developing new methods used
to carry out the FPPC’s mission. The FPPC’s
mission is to “promote the integrity of representa-
tive state and local government in California
through fair, impartial interpretation and enforce-
ment of political campaign, lobbying, and conflict
of interest laws.”
The draft plan has three parts:
1) Service to the Public
2) Changes to the Political Reform Act
3) Resources/Staff Development
According to materials distributed at the July
FPPC meeting, changes made in the FPPC’s
service to the public will primarily consist of
evaluating the effectiveness of FPPC telephone,
written, and web advice, developing a time/cost
accounting system, and reducing the backlog of
cases. Materials regarding the Commission’s
strategic planning effort were included as part of
item 13 on the Commission’s July agenda materi-
als, which are available at www.fppc.ca.gov.
At a recent Institute for Local Government
(ILG) board meeting, FPPC Commissioner Ray
Remy emphasized FPPC’s interest in hearing
from local officials on the FPPC’s strategic plan-
ning efforts. FPPC hopes to finalize the plan
during the fall.
To offer thoughts on the FPPC’s strategic
planning efforts, please write FPPC Executive
Director Mark Krausse at 428 J Street, Suite 620,
Sacramento, CA 95814, so he can share them
with the Commission.
FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES
COMMISSION ENGAGES IN STRATEGIC
PLANNING PROCESS
The International City/County Management
Association (ICMA) will hold a webcast on base
realignment and closure (BRAC) topics on Tues-
day, September 13, at 11 a.m. PST.
The webcast is sponsored in part by Lennar-
LNR, and is for local government officials and
others likely to be impacted by the 2005 BRAC
round.
The webcast is designed to help local govern-
ments and community stakeholders understand
the BRAC process by sharing the successes
achieved and obstacles faced by city managers,
federal environmental and defense officials, and
private sector experts in the cleanup and redevel-
opment of closed military bases.
“BRAC 05: The Good, the Bad, and the Expe-
dited-Trends, Tools, and Challenges” will discuss
a number of topics including early transfers,
conservation conveyances, public sales, land use
controls and management tools, the distress of
rural communities, and much more. Greg Morell,
vice president, Land Group, Lennar-LNR; Richard
Engel of Marstel-Day, LLC; and Steven Powers,
county administrator, County of Marquette, Mich.,
will present this webcast jointly.
Those who should attend include city and
county managers, economic development direc-
tors, public works directors, general counsels,
other senior local government officials, and private
sector consultants working on behalf of local
governments. Requirements for participants
include a computer with Internet access (56k
modem or higher) and a separate telephone line
for the audio portion of the webcast.
The webcast costs $95 per site. For more
information, and to register, visit www.lgean.org/
html/training or call toll-free at (877) 865-4326.
ICMA TO HOLD WEBCAST ON BRACPRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 3 Visit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org
What steps can a public agency take to minimize
the likelihood of an ethics scandal? One way is to
engage in self-assessment of the agency’s current
compliance practices.
The Institute for Local Government (ILG), the
League’s nonprofit research, armhas just released a
handy tool to engage in such self-assessment. En-
titled “Ethics Law Compliance Best Practices,” the
checklist includes a series of questions agency officials
can ask themselves to make sure the agency has
practices in place designed to maximize compliance
with a wide variety of ethics-related laws.
The guide reflects the recognition that compliance
with ethics laws is best accomplished through a series
of affirmative steps. Because of the breadth and
complexity of ethics-related laws, it’s hard for compli-
ance to “just happen.”
ILG’s mission is to develop forward-thinking
resources to assist local officials in serving their
communities. The Best Practices checklist is a part of
ILG’s continuing work in the area of promoting public
confidence in local government. ILG is very grateful to
the law firm of Best, Best and Krieger for its financial
support of this resource, as well those who responded
to the ILG’s request for peer reviewers on the
League’s listserves.
Hard copies of the checklist are being mailed to
city managers and city attorneys this month as an
enclosure in their respective department newsletters.
You can also review the electronic version of the
checklist at www.ca-ilg.org/bestpractices. The checklist
will also be one of the handouts at the “Ethics Best
Practices and Tools For Local Officials” session at the
League’s Annual Conference, offered as part of the
leadership and governance track.
Those interested in thinking more about what it
takes to foster a culture of ethics in an agency are
encouraged to review an additional series of questions
at www.ca-ilg.org/culturechecks. ILG hopes to be able
to offer this self-assessment tool online as a database,
which would tabulate a given agency’s officials’ and
employees’ responses to the questions.
For more information, contact ILG’s Executive
Director, JoAnne Speers, at speersj@cacities.org.
ILG RELEASES ‘ETHICS LAW COMPLIANCE
BEST PRACTICES’ GUIDE
The W2i Digital Cities Convention will be held
on October 10-12, at the San Francisco Airport
Marriott in San Mateo, and will be co-hosted by
the City and County of San Francisco & the
Wireless Internet Institute (www.w2i.org). The
convention will bring together local government
officials, systems integrators and technology and
service providers to explore the full range of
opportunities surrounding the planning and
deployment of broadband wireless networks for
cities, counties and regions.
Co-Chaired by Chris A. Vein, senior advisor
for technology to San Francisco Mayor Gavin
Newsom, this interactive two-day session will put
an emphasis on applications and services to
improve municipal workforce productivity and
share excess capacity for broadband digital
inclusion. The convention will also provide cities
the opportunity to interact with pioneering local
government peers in an informal environment. It
will feature:
• Two days of conference keynotes and
interactive plenary sessions with an emphasis on
shared infrastructure, emerging cooperation
agreements between local governments and
service operators, sharing of best-practices and
understanding what is required to build and
operate a productive wireless network infrastruc-
ture.
• A showcase exhibit featuring select
emerging technology vendors, systems integra-
tors and service providers to discuss their work
with local-government professionals.
• Vendors exhibiting include Intel, IBM,
Motorola, EarthLink, HP, Airpath, Neoreach
Wireless and BelAir Networks.
Over the last two years, W2i has led a global
effort to accelerate the adoption of broadband
wireless Internet in cooperation with international
development organizations (including the UN and
W2I DIGITAL CITIES CONVENTION
SET FOR OCTOBER
READY TO TAKE YOUR CITY DIGITAL?
Continued on Page 4Visit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org
PAGE 4/PRIORITY FOCUS
World Bank), as well as industry standards
organizations and private sector stakeholders. It
has primarily focused its activities on exploring
the opportunities for broadband wireless infra-
structure to improve local government workforce
productivity, foster economic development and
accelerate digital inclusion for all communities.
The conference will also feature Wireless
Communities Best Practices Awards. Submis-
sions for these awards are due on September 1.
You may download the nomination form from the
conference website.
Registration discounts are available before
September 1. Visit
www.w2idigitalcitiesconvention.com for confer-
ence details and other information on this ex-
panding issue for cities.
W2I UPDATE from page 3
Have you visited the Institute for Local
Government’s (ILG) Housing Resource Center
lately? ILG just uploaded a variety of redevelop-
ment agency case studies as part of the “tools”
section of the resource center. Like the other
tools described on the website, redevelopment
offers one mechanism to address the state’s
need for housing.
The shortcut to these case studies is
www.ca-ilg.org/rdacasestudies, but feel encour-
aged to browse the resource center’s other
offerings. ILG is very grateful to the Fannie Mae
Foundation for its support of the Housing Re-
source Center project.
Does your city have a housing experience
from which others can learn? We are adding to
the resource center weekly and welcome leads
on information to include. To share your suc-
cess stories, please contact Shana Graham at
sgraham@cacities.org.
HOUSING RESOURCE CENTER
CONTINUES TO EXPAND
FEINSTEIN/BOXER from page 1
The bill seeks to eliminate or nationalize the
cable and video franchising process. In its letter of
opposition, the League stressed that if the measure
were signed into law, it would deprive local govern-
ments of part of their ability to manage, ensure
safety, and receive compensation for the public
rights-of-way. In addition, the League expressed
concern that the bill would severely hamper the
overall effort to have broadband deployed in com-
munities because of the costly burdens on local
government.
“Local governments’ ability to ensure that public
safety is maintained would be seriously jeopardized
without authority over the physical rights-of-way
established through the franchising process,”
explained League Executive Director Chris
McKenzie, in the letter. “While citizens want better
programming at lower prices, they do not want
potholes in their roads, water main breaks, and
traffic jams during rush hour as a consequence.”
McKenzie also maintained that the League
looks forward to working with both Sens. Feinstein
and Boxer to address California cities’ concerns
with S. 1504 and other telecommunications mea-
sures that advance in the future.
For a copy of the League’s recently adopted
“Telecommunications Principles,” please visit the
League website at www.cacities.org.
2005 LEAGUE ANNUAL
CONFERENCE: OCTOBER 5-8,
MOSCONE CONVENTION CENTER,
SAN FRANCISCO
Plan now to attend the League’s 2005
Annual Conference this fall - the first time it
has been in San Francisco since 1997.
Make your reservations through our
online system at www.cacities.org/ac.Visit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 5
Legislative Bill Action
The following are summaries of just a few of the legislative bills that are currently being acted upon
by the League of California Cities. For more information about these and other bills, please visit
the League website to access information about legislation, policy issues and related develop-
ments. You can track information on bills (www.cacities.org/billsearch), locate legislators and
legislative committees, send letters to legislators or the media through the online Advocacy Center
(www.cacities.org/advocacycenter), research League policy positions, access useful related
links, and much more.
ENVIRONMENTAL
AB 1665 (Laird). Flood Control. Levees.
AB 1665 is sponsored by the administration and is
intended to begin addressing the very serious
problem of protecting Californians from possible
flooding due to levee failures. The seriousness of
the levee situation, the political dynamics of
attempting to reach resolution, the financial im-
pacts, and the various conflicting perspectives
were clearly outlined by Sacramento Bee colum-
nist Dan Walters on Sunday, August 14.
As Walters’ column observed, “Largely hidden,
if sometimes heated, clashes have resulted
between those who want to build and buy and
those who worry about the dangers of placing
more homes and families behind levees of dubi-
ous strength.” (For the full article go to
www.sacbee.com, Sunday , August 14, 2005). In
its current form, however, AB 1665 ducks that
difficult issue.
Walters’ column referenced a position state-
ment issued in January by the California Depart-
ment of Water Resources that stated, “California’s
Central Valley flood control system is deteriorating
and, in some places, literally washing away.” The
paper continued: “Furthermore, the Central
Valley’s growing population is pushing new hous-
ing developments and job centers into areas that
are particularly vulnerable to flooding. Yet in recent
years, funding to maintain and upgrade the flood
protection infrastructure has sharply declined.”
Complicating the situation is the recent
Paterno decision. In that case, the court found
that the state was liable for damages arising from
failure of so-called “project levees” built by the
federal government with state participation. The
state had to pay nearly $500 million to cover
damages as a result of the case.
After months of negotiations among various
stakeholders, including the League, AB 1665 was
amended this week to reflect a relatively narrow
proposal that focuses on mapping of “levee failure
inundation zones,” information gathering about the
status of levees, and notification of property
owners that live in the inundation zones with the
suggestion that they purchase flood insurance. A
key piece of the levee situation includes funding to
upgrade and maintain levees. Unfortunately,
another administration- sponsored bill, ACA 13
(Harman), which would exempt from Proposition
218’s voter approval requirements fees related to
levee repair (and storm water), is stalled in the
Assembly Local Government Committee.
AB 1665 applies primarily to federal levees that
are defined as “...any levee that is part of the
federal and state authorized flood control project
located in the Sacramento and San Joaquin
Rivers drainage for which the [state Reclamation]
board or the department [of Water Resources]
has given the nonfederal assurances to the United
States required for the project.” However, it also
includes some reporting requirements to other
levees operated or maintained by other agencies.
Cities that are impacted by the levee system
covered in the bill, either because they are within a
potential levee failure inundation zone or because
they own or operate a levee, should carefully
Continued on Page 6Visit the League’s Official Website -- www.cacities.org
PAGE 6/PRIORITY FOCUS
Legislative Bill Action
review AB 1665 and send their comments to the
League and the bill’s author. At this time, the
League does not have a position on AB 1665 and
is studying its provisions carefully.
The future of AB 1665 remains uncertain. It is
unclear whether the bill will receive the necessary
rule waivers to be heard in the last month of the
session, and even if it is heard, whether or not it
has the votes to pass. However, the topic of flood
control and how to improve the levee system in
California is a major issue facing the state that will
continue to be on the table for discussion in the
future. Staff: Yvonne Hunter; Status: Pending in
Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee;
Position: Review and Comment.
CONFERENCE from page 1
The conference will be held at Moscone Center
West on October 5-8, and will feature a number of
guest speakers and informative sessions that will
give city officials and League members the edge
they need to build upon prior successes.
Keynote and General Session Speakers to
Deliver
National League of Cities President and Wash-
ington, D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams will provide
the keynote address, sharing his thoughts on
federal issues that will affect your city, and his
insights on how cities relationships with the federal
government are evolving. Other general session
speakers are:
· Richard Jackson, M.D., MPH, California’s
former director of public health, and a world-
renowned expert on healthy cities. Dr. Jackson will
address another general session on the public
health impacts of sprawl and traffic, and how we
can build cities that are more conductive to
healthier living.
· Steven D. Levitt, Ph.D., an economist with
the University of Chicago and author of the best-
selling book, “Freakonomics.” Dr. Levitt’s research
will challenge convention assumptions about
numerous policy issues affecting your city and
society as a whole. He will set forth his argu-
ment that economics is really the study of incen-
tives, and how people can get what they want or
need when other people want or need the same
thing.
A returning speaker, the ever popular Arch
Lustberg, will speak on dynamic communica-
tion, based on his background of coaching
governors, congressional leaders, presidential
appointees and business leaders on effective
communication. Susan RoAne, a nationwide
expert on networking, will also be speaking.
Housing, Infrastructure, Telecom and
More. More than 70 sessions are planned for
the conference, including sessions on housing
and infrastructure, telecommunications legisla-
tion, financing, successfully handling ballot
measures, effective management, leadership
and governance, and much more! There will
also be programming directed specifically at
small cities, and all the programs swill include
shorter and less formal briefings, leaving time for
more discussion.
Exposition: Vendors and Services YOU
NEED! The expo portion of the League’s Annual
Conference promises to be one of the most well
attended in conference history. More than 250
exhibitors will be on-hand featuring services and
products to assist in streamlining your city’s
operations, save money, and help respond to the
concerns of your residents. Your city hall col-
leagues who may not otherwise attend the
conference can visit the expo for free! Just have
them go to the Exhibit Registration Desk and sign
up for an admission badge.
Networking Opportunities. Social events
are another important opportunity for city officials
to share information and learn from one another.
To aid this process, the nearly 100 businesses
and organizations that are 2005 League Partners
will host a reception on the evening of October 6,
along with exhibitors. Network and chat with
colleagues or with the exhibitors!
Continued on Page 7Visit the League’s Official Website -- www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 7
ILG Symposium on Emerging Issues. The
League’s nonprofit research arm, the Institute for
Local Government (ILG) has a Luncheon Sympo-
sium, which is a new addition to this year’s
events. The symposium will be held on October 6
from 12:30 p.m. to 2 p.m. and will feature author
Daniel Yankelovich, who will speak on emerging
issues that cities face in the years ahead and what
you can do now to prepare for them. Tickets for
this event are $40, and you can sign up when you
register for the conference at www.ca-ilg.org/
symposium.
To register for the League Annual Conference,
visit the League website at www.cacities.org/ed.
For more information, you can also contact the
League’s Conference Registration Desk at (916)
658-8291. Please note that attendees will
need to make their own hotel reservations for
this event.
CONFERENCE from page 6
The hearing opened with testimony from Chief
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Affairs Richard
Frank. He testified that the Kelo decision did not
expand upon eminent domain authority available to
state and local governments. He also identified
differences between Connecticut and California
that ensure that private property owners in Califor-
nia enjoy stronger protections in eminent domain
cases than were available to the homeowners in
the Kelo case.
The California Redevelopment Association
(CRA) was represented at the hearing by Joe
Coomes, Jr., from CRA’s general counsel,
McDonough Holland & Allen. Bill Higgins, a land
use attorney with the League’s Institute for Local
Government (ILG), testified on behalf of the
League and ILG.
Both witnesses emphasized that the Kelo
decision had no affect on California law and that
existing rights and procedural protections for
property owners in redevelopment areas remain in
place.
Two private property rights advocates spoke
for the need for stronger protections for California
property owners. They urged support for SCA 15
(McClintock) and ACA 22 (LaMalfa), two identical
constitutional amendments that would ban the use
of eminent domain to take any kind of private
property from one party and transferring it to
another private party - even property damaged by
natural disasters, environmentally hazardous
properties, blighted properties taken to construct
affordable housing, etc.
The League is opposing these two measures,
because we believe they are an over-reaction to
the Supreme Court decision, and fail to take into
consideration the vastly stronger protections that
exist in California to protect property owners from
local governments’ improper or unreasonable use
of eminent domain.
The committee took no action, but did talk
about the need for further study to determine
whether additional legislation is needed to
strengthen protections for property owners by
amending the definition of blight or providing some
reform of the civil procedures required of a rede-
velopment agency before it can embark on emi-
nent domain proceedings.
Committee Chairwoman Christine Kehoe
(San Diego) announced that she was introducing
three measures dealing with eminent domain:
SCA 12 (co-author Sen. Tom Torlakson); SB 53
and SB 1026. The chairwoman also said there
would be additional study and discussion of the
eminent domain issue during the three-and-a-half
weeks before the Legislature recesses on Sep-
tember 9.
For more on the eminent domain bills, see
“Senate Introduces Eminent Domain Legislation”
on page 8.
EMINENT DOMAIN from page 1Visit the League’s Official Website -- www.cacities.org
PAGE 8/PRIORITY FOCUS
There were four measures introduced in the
Senate this week dealing with questions relating
to eminent domain. They are:
• SCA 12 by Sens. Tom Torlakson and
Christine Kehoe (principal co-authors are
Assemblymembers Gene Mullin and
Simon Salinas) is a proposed constitu-
tional amendment that, if approved by the
voters, would prohibit the use of eminent
domain for thetaking of “owner-occupied
residential property” for private use.
• SB 53 by Sen. Christine Kehoe would
require new and existing redevelopment
plans to declare whether eminent domain
will be used and specifically allows the
agency to prohibit the use of eminent
domain for certain uses such as owner-
occupied residential property or in certain
geographic areas. (Agencies have the
authority to do that now.)
The use of eminent domain in new plans
would be initially limited to 10 years (in-
stead of 12 in current law) from adoption
of the plan. For plans adopted before
January 1, 2006, they would have to be
amended before July 1, 2006 to include
the planned uses of eminent domain and a
time limit on the use of eminent domain
not beyond July 1, 2009. This bill may be a
“spot bill” that wil be kept available for
further amendments.
• SB 1026 by Sen. Kehoe would impose
a two-year moratorium on the use of
eminent domain for the taking of “owner-
occupied residential property” for private
use. It would also require the California
Research Bureau to report to the Legisla-
ture by January 1, 2007 on all condemna-
tions of owner-occupied residential prop-
erty for private use from 1996 to 2006, and
what became of those properties.
SENATE INTRODUCES EMINENT DOMAIN LEGISLATION
Companion measures to SCA 12 and SB 1026
are expected to be introduced in the Assembly in
the next few days.
• SB 1099 by Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth
would prohibit the use of eminent domain
for “agricultural property” unless the con-
demning government retains direct owner-
ship of the property or the property is
transferred to a private entity for health care
facilities, public utilities, or transit facilities.
SCA 12 and SB 1026, along with the compan-
ion Assembly bills when they are amended, repre-
sent the Democratic alternatives to SCA 15
(McClintock) and ACA 22 (LaMalfa), extreme
measures that would all but end the use of emi-
nent domain for redevelopment.
League Remains Opposed to SCA 15 and
ACA 22. While the League has not taken positions
on these newest bills, we continue to oppose to
SCA 15 and ACA 22, along with the California
Redevelopment Association (CRA). We urge local
government officials to let legislators know of your
opposition to these two bills and the adverse affect
they would have on the ability to do local commu-
nity improvements if you have not already done so.
For examples of communities using eminent
domain to reduce crime and restore blighted
areas, please visit the League’s website at
www.cacities.org.
For more information on this and
other League issues, visit
www.cacities.org.
August 26, 2005
Issue #34-2005
WANT MORE DET AILS
ON BILLS?
Visit the League of
California Cities
website at
www.cacities.org/
billsearch.
THE TEXAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS REFORM MEASURE
HOUSING RESOURCE CENTER CONTINUES TO EXPAND
BILL SUMMARIES
Page 3
Page 6
Annual Conference,
October 5-8, 2005 -
San Francisco
The Texas Legislature just completed a long and somewhat difficult battle over
the regulation of the communications industry in that state. The question for
California, and for the rest of the nation, is whether this new law will be unique to
Texas, or does it become the road map that guides all future state and/or federal
legislation on the telecommunications issue? Only time will tell, but we do know
that telecommunications will be an issue of intense interest over the next year or
two in California and in Washington D.C. For more, see Page 2.
AS TEXAS GOES . . . SO GOES CALIFORNIA?
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SHOOTOUT IN THE LONE STAR STATE!
The National League of Cities (NLC) Center for Research & Municipal
Programs recently published a variety of reports and briefs of interest to
California cities. For more, see Page 2.
NLC CENTER FOR RESEARCH & MUNICIPAL PROGRAMS
PUBLISHES RESEARCH UPDATE
The Federal Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission
(BRAC) began voting this week on Pentagon recommendations for realign-
ment or closure of military installations around the nation. With the voting
nearly complete, the commissioners have declined to “rubber stamp” a
number of the Pentagon’s... For more, see Page 2.
BRAC COMMISSION SPARES SOME
CALIFORNIA MILITARY SITES
HOT BILLS
OPPOSE SCA 15
(McClintock). Eminent
Domain: Condemna-
tion Proceedings.
OPPOSE ACA 22
(La Malfa). Eminent
Domain: Condemna-
tion Proceedings.Visit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org
PAGE 2/PRIORITY FOCUS
What Texas Did
After a bill that seriously threatened local fran-
chise authority and revenues was defeated in the
regular legislative session (with the cities of the state
joining with the cable industry to kill the legislation), a
special session was called and the Legislature
reconvened to consider another approach to the
issue. Ultimately, a measure was passed that will
substantially alter the regulatory framework for the
Texas communications industry, as well as for local
government.
A central piece of the Texas legislation was the
elimination of local franchise authority and the estab-
lishment of a state franchise authority. Franchise
revenues were preserved and for some cities the
revenues were increased.
As reform discussions continue in California, with
the Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee
currently taking the lead, the Texas legislation clearly
sets a standard for the battle that will take place here,
in other states and in the next session of Congress.
We highly recommend that city officials review
the following summary of the Texas legislation pro-
vided by the Texas Municipal League. It may give us a
hint of “things to come” in California.
Among those reports are:
Local Budget and Tax Policy in the U.S.: Percep-
tions of City Officials
The State of America’s Cities 2005: The Annual
Opinion Survey of Municipal Elected Officials
Strengthening Families in America’s Cities: A
Survey on Municipal Conditions, Policies and Re-
sources for Children and Families
These reports can be found online at
www.nlc.org.
For a hardcopy of any report, please contact
Christy Brennan at brennan@nlc.org or Chris Hoene
at hoene@nlc.org.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS from page 1
Continued on Page 3
NLC from page 1
recommendations, indicating that the commis-
sioners are exercising their own judgments about
the impact that their decisions will have on military
preparedness and the communities where military
installations are located.
At press time, the commission has made the
following recommendations regarding military
installations in California:
Installations to Remain in Operation
• Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey
County
• The Defense Language Institute in
Monterey County
• Navy Broadway Complex in San Diego
County (remains open with a deadline)
• Naval Support Activity Center in Riverside
County
• Marine Corps Logistics Base in San
Bernardino County
• Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC),
Corona
Realignments
• Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow
• Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach in San
Diego County
Installations to Be Closed
• Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant in
Stanislaus County
• Naval Weapons Station Concord (as
requested by the community)
• Onizuka AFB in SUnnyvale was closed as
recommended by Department of Defense
(DOD)
• Army Reserve Center in Moffett Field
• Army Reserve Center in San Jose
• Army Reserve Center in Mountain View
• Army Reserve Center in Pasadena
• Army Reserve Center in Long Beach
• Army Reserve Center in Los Angeles
BRAC from page 1
Continued on Page 8PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 3 Visit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org
1. It creates a statewide cable and video
franchise to be administered by the state Public
Utility Commission (PUC).
2. It requires an entity seeking to provide
cable or video service in Texas after September
1, 2005, to file an application with the PUC for the
state-issued certificate of franchise authority.
3. It provides that an entity providing cable
or video service pursuant to a franchise agree-
ment with a city may not seek a state franchise
until the expiration of the existing franchise
agreement. However, non-incumbent cable
service providers that serve fewer than 40
percent of the total cable customers in a particu-
lar municipal franchise area may elect to termi-
nate the existing franchise agreement and move
to a state-issued certificate of franchise authority
if they do so by January 1, 2006.
4. It requires the PUC to issue a certificate
of franchise within 14 business days of the
receipt of an application provided that, among
other things, the applicant: (a) agrees to comply
with all federal laws and regulations; (b) agrees
to comply with all city regulations regarding the
use of the public rights-of-way (ROW), including
the police powers of the city; and (c) provides a
description of the service area footprint to be
served.
5. It provides that a state-issued certificate
of franchise shall contain a grant of authority to
use a city’s ROWs, subject to the police powers
of a city.
6. It provides that the certificate of franchise
is fully transferable to successors in interest.
7. It provides that a condition of issuance of
a statewide franchise is that the obligations of
the entity providing cable or video service will
continue to be honored, paid, or performed just
as though the entity continued to operate under
its prior franchise.
8. It requires a statewide franchise holder
to make a quarterly payment to each city in
which it provides service; and that the payment
be equal to five percent of gross revenues, as
that term is defined in the bill, earned by the
franchise holder in that city.
9. It authorizes the state or a city to review
the business records of a provider to ensure
proper payment of fees.
10. It provides that until the expiration of the
incumbent cable provider’s franchise agree-
ment, a statewide franchise holder shall pay to
a city a pro rata amount of cash to cover any
in-kind services received by the city.
11. It provides that following the expiration
of the incumbent provider’s franchise agree-
ment, a statewide franchise holder shall pay
each city either an amount equal to one per-
cent of the provider’s gross revenue or a
monthly, per-subscriber line fee (if such fee
was imposed under previous franchise agree-
ments) in lieu of in-kind services and opera-
tional grants.
12. It requires an incumbent cable provider
to provide certain services, such as cable
service to city and other public buildings, until
January 1, 2008, or the expiration of a fran-
chise agreement, whichever is later, after
which time providers will provide the services
at their incremental cost and deduct the
amount from the franchise fee owed to the city.
13. It exempts the holder of a statewide
franchise from any “build-out” requirements.
14. It requires: (a) a statewide franchise
holder to comply with federal customer service
requirements until there are two or more
providers offering service to an area; and (b)
the PUC to post the number of complaints
regarding each service provider on its website.
THE TEXAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS REFORM MEASURE
Continued on Page 4 Page 1 of 3Visit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org
PAGE 4/PRIORITY FOCUS
15. It requires a statewide franchise holder
to: (a) provide a city, upon request, with public,
educational, and governmental access chan-
nels (PEG Channels) to be operated by the
city for noncommercial programming, with
certain limitations and restrictions; (b) provide
the same number of PEG channels as pro-
vided under the existing city cable franchise;
and (c) provide to a city without a PEG chan-
nel a certain number of them based on popula-
tion.
16. It mandates that a city allow a state-
wide franchise holder to install, construct, and
maintain a communications network in the
city’s ROWs and prohibit discrimination
against providers.
17. It provides that a city may enforce
police-power-based regulations in the man-
agement of the public ROWs against a state-
wide franchise holder to the extent that the
regulations are reasonably necessary to
protect the health, safety, and welfare of the
public.
18. It prohibits a city from requiring a
statewide franchise holder to: (a) maintain a
business office in the city; (b) obtain bonding
or insurance for activities within the city; or (c)
pay any fee for a permit to work in the city’s
ROW, but allows the city to require a state-
wide franchise holder to register with the city
and maintain a point of contact.
19. It provides that: (a) a city must
promptly process any request from a state-
wide franchise holder to construct or maintain
any facilities in the city’s ROW; and (b) a
provider may begin work under certain circum-
stances without a permit if it notifies the city as
promptly as possible after work begins.
20. It provides that the PUC has no juris-
diction to review a city’s police power regula-
tions governing the city’s ROWs.
21. It requires a provider to indemnify a city
for the negligent acts of the provider while
working in the ROW.
22. It prohibits a statewide franchise holder
from discriminating against any group of poten-
tial residential subscribers based on income in
the “local area” in which the group resides.
23. It provides that the state may enforce any
of its franchise provisions in a court of compe-
tent jurisdiction, and that a city may be a party to
such litigation.
The bill also:
1. Changes the telecommunications ac-
cess line system to require voice over Internet
protocol (VOIP) service providers to pay the
right-of-way access line fee to cities.
2. Provides that a city does not have juris-
diction over broadband over power line (BPL)
systems or services, including the rates, opera-
tions, or services of an electric utility or trans-
mission and distribution utility that are related to
providing BPL.
3. Provides that an electric utility may
implement BPL under the procedures set forth in
the bill, but is not required to do so.
4. Prohibits an electric utility from being
penalized for providing or not providing BPL.
5. Authorizes an electric utility to elect to:
(a) allow an affiliate to own or operate a BPL
system on its electric delivery system; (b) allow
an unaffiliated entity to own or operate a BPL
system on the utility’s electric delivery system; or
(c) allow an affiliate or unaffiliated entity to
provide Internet service over a BPL system.
6. Provides that the installation of a BPL
system on an electric delivery system shall not
require the utility or the owner of the BPL system
THE TEXAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS REFORM MEASURE
Continued on Page 5
Page 2 of 3Visit the League’s Official Website--www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 5
THE TEXAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS REFORM MEASURE
to obtain other rights-of-way or to make pay-
ments for easements in addition to payments
made by the utility for the placement of its
electric delivery system.
7. Provides that an electric utility that
allows BPL shall employ all reasonable mea-
sures to protect electric reliability.
8. Prohibits the Public Utility Commission
or any state or local government from: (a)
requiring a utility to install a BPL system on its
power lines or to offer BPL services in all or
any part of the utility’s certificated service area;
(b) requiring a utility to allow others to install a
BPL system on the utility’s electric delivery
system; or (c) prohibiting a utility from installing
a BPL system or offering BPL services in any
part or all of the utility’s certificated service
area.
9. Provides that if a city is already collect-
ing a charge or fee from an electric utility for
the use of a street, alley, or public way for the
delivery of electricity to retail electric custom-
ers, the city is prohibited from requiring a BPL
franchise and is prohibited from imposing or
collecting a charge, fee, or tax from an electric
utility for installing equipment to facilitate BPL
services on an existing electric distribution
system.
10. Authorizes the state or a city to impose
a charge on the provision of BPL services that
is no greater than the lowest charge the state
or a city imposes on other broadband providers
for use of the public rights-of-way.
11. Provides that a municipally owned utility
is not prohibited from providing energy-related
data services, such as load management or
automated meter reading, to its energy cus-
tomers.
12. Prohibits a city or a municipally owned
utility from discriminating against a certified
telecommunications provider regarding the
use of the public rights-of-way.
13. Prohibits a city or a municipally owned
utility from charging more for a pole attach-
ment than is allowed by federal law, and
requires a city or MOU to establish a single,
uniform pole attachment fee prior to Septem-
ber 1, 2006.
14. Requires a study of the purposes of
the Universal Service Fund, and whether the
fund has achieved its goals.
15. Provides that all incumbent local
exchange markets are deregulated on January
1, 2006 (or January 1, 2007, for areas with a
population less than 30,000); unless the Public
Utility Commission determines that a market
should remain regulated.
16. Provides that an incumbent local
exchange company may elect to remain
regulated.
17. Requires telecommunications and
cable employees to provide identification when
entering real property to work within a public
right of way.
18. Creates a telecommunications com-
petitiveness legislative oversight committee to
report to the legislature on telecommunica-
tions issues.
Page 3 of 3Visit the League’s Official Website -- www.cacities.org
PAGE 6/PRIORITY FOCUS
Legislative Bill Action
The following are summaries of just a few of the legislative bills that are currently being acted upon
by the League of California Cities. For more information about these and other bills, please visit
the League website to access information about legislation, policy issues and related develop-
ments. You can track information on bills (www.cacities.org/billsearch), locate legislators and
legislative committees, send letters to legislators or the media through the online Advocacy Center
(www.cacities.org/advocacycenter), research League policy positions, access useful related
links, and much more.
ENVIRONMENTAL
AB 1665 (Laird). Flood Control. Levees. AB
1665 is a two-year bill and will not be heard or
moved this year. In its current form, AB 1665
begins the process of addressing the status of the
state’s flood control and levee system, including
requiring mapping of potential flood inundation
zones, notification of property owners in those
zones and information gathering about the status of
the levees and their ability to protect public health,
safety and property.
AB 1665 became a two-year bill because it did
not get the necessary rule waiver to be heard this
week in the Senate Natural Resources and Water
Committee. More information on the details of AB
1665 and the general issue of levees and flood
protection was included in last week’s issue of
Priority Focus. Staff: Yvonne Hunter; Status:
Pending in Senate Natural Resources and Water
Committee (two-year bill); Position: Review and
Comment.
SB 655 (Ortiz). Naturally Occurring Asbes-
tos. SB 655 is intended to ensure that development
and other projects in areas that have naturally
occurring asbestos (NOA) incorporate mitigation
measures to reduce dust and exposure to airborne
asbestos. NOA is an evolving health issue that is
only now being recognized as a serious problem.
The League has engaged in extensive discus-
sion with the author’s office, other local government
organizations and other stakeholders to explore
how to make the bill work without restricting local
government regulatory authority or imposing inap-
propriate conditions on local governments within
areas containing naturally occurring asbestos.
In that spirit, the League offered several
amendments that would address the League’s
concerns regarding maintaining local regulatory
authority and discretion, while at the same time
ensuring appropriate notice and implementation
of best management practices designed to
mitigate development in areas with natural
occurring asbestos.
The author’s office has accepted those
amendments with some minor modifications and
they will go into the bill on the Assembly Floor.
The League has indicated that if our amend-
ments are accepted, we will be neutral on SB
665; if they had not been accepted, we would
have opposed the bill. Since the author intends
to accept other amendments, the League will
wait to review the entire package before formally
adopting a neutral position.
In addition to requiring the State Geologist to
map those counties with naturally occurring
asbestos, SB 655 would require the California
Environmental Protection Agency to convene a
Task Force to compile and distribute advisory
best management practices that can be used to
mitigate the impacts of naturally occurring asbes-
tos, would require disclosure to purchasers that
property is located in a NOA zone zones and
would require cities and counties to amend their
general plan safety elements to reflect NOA
zones, once the mapping is complete.Visit the League’s Official Website -- www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 7
Legislative Bill Action
Furthermore, the League’s suggested amend-
ments delete the requirement that local govern-
ments adopt the best management practices
developed by the Task Force into local ordinances.
Instead, prior to approving a project, a city or
county would require a project proponent to
provide a summary of how it plans to implement
the mitigation measures required by the local air
district, which already has the authority to require
NOA mitigation for most large projects. For those
projects not subject to air district authority, a city
or county would be required to provide a one-page
summary of mitigation measures that could be
taken. Finally, local governments would be re-
quired to consider the best management practices
suggested by the Task Force, and adopt those it
deems appropriate.
The League thanks Senator Ortiz and her staff
for working closely with the League and for under-
standing and responding to our concerns. It is
likely that the amended version of SB 655 will not
be available until later next week. Staff: Yvonne
Hunter; Status: Pending on Assembly Floor;
Position: Watch; anticipated neutral.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
SB 412 (Figueroa). Massage Therapy.
State and Local Regulation. SB 412 is a two-
year bill. The intent of SB 412 is to provide a
statewide regulatory and licensing framework for
massage therapists. However, in doing so, the
current version of the bill would preempt most of
local government’s regulatory authority over
massage therapists. Many local governments
regulate massage therapy establishments and
therapists. This is done as a way of differentiating
between legitimate establishments and practitio-
ners and those that are, to put it politely, less than
legitimate and more attuned to the darker side of
our cities.
The League has been in discussions with the
author’s office and supporters about the preemp-
tion issue and held a conference call this week
that included representatives from city police
departments, counties, the author’s office and the
supporters. While the conversation was produc-
tive, it is clear that there is still much to discuss
and negotiate relative to preemption in SB 412.
Based upon that conversation and other issues,
the author decided to make SB 412 a two-year bill,
since only two weeks remains in the session, and
that is not enough time to resolve the numerous
outstanding issues.
The League has told the author that we are
willing to continue discussions through the fall and
will withhold sending an oppose letter at this time.
Although all involved hope that resolution can be
reached, the League also has made it clear that
we are prepared to oppose the bill if agreement is
not reach.
We thank Senator Figueroa and her staff for
their willingness to engage in serious discussions
with local government to address our concerns.
In the meantime, city officials should not get too
bent out of shape about the provisions of SB 412.
We are attempting to massage the language to
address our concerns and won’t throw in the
towel until the discussions are complete. Staff:
Yvonne Hunter; Status: Pending in Assembly
Appropriations Committee (two-year bill); Posi-
tion: Watch.
SB 861 (Speier). Animal Control. Local
Regulation of Vicious Dogs. SB 861 would
return some limited authority to local governments
to regulate vicious dogs. The bill is in response to
several tragic accidents where children have been
mauled or killed after being attacked by pit bulls.
While the bill would permit cities and counties to
enact dog breed-specific ordinances pertaining to
mandatory spay or neuter programs and breeding
requirements, it would not permit a city or county
to ban a specific breed or declare that a breed or
mix breed is potentially dangerous.
SB 861 passed the Assembly this week and is
expected to be heard next week in the Senate
Local Government Committee. It would then go to
the Senate Floor for concurrence in AssemblyVisit the League’s Official Website -- www.cacities.org
PAGE 8/PRIORITY FOCUS
Legislative Bill Action
amendments. Interested cities should send
support letters to their senators. Staff: Yvonne
Hunter; Status: Pending in Senate Local Govern-
ment; Position: Support.
TRANSPORTATION
SB 1102 (Hollingsworth). Pocket bikes:
restrictions. SB 1102 would prohibit the use of a
pocket bike on a sidewalk, roadway, highway,
bikeway, bicycle path or trail, equestrian trail,
hiking or recreation trail, or on public lands avail-
able to off-highway motor vehicle use. SB 1102
authorizes a peace officer to remove and seize a
pocket bike that is found to be operating in viola-
tion of this bill for a minimum of 48 hours.
Pocket bikes are small, two-wheeled vehicles
that may only be operated on private property with
the owner’s consent. They are a growing safety
concern because they can exceed 35 miles per
hour and due to their small size, are often difficult
to see. SB 1102 improves public safety on local
streets and roads by limiting the use of pocket
bikes. SB 1102 also grants authority at the city
and county level to adopt a regulation ensuring
that all costs, seizure, removal and storage fees
be placed upon the violator. Staff: Liisa Lawson
Stark; Status: Assembly Floor; Position: Sup-
port.
• Navy Marine Corps Reserve Center Los
Angeles
• Navy Marine Corps Reserve Center
Encino
China Lake gained jobs (three-fourths of those
jobs from Ventura County and one-fourth of the
jobs from other states). Point Mugu retained jobs
that could have moved to China Lake and re-
mained open.
All that is left for California is the BRAC
Commission’s decision on the Air Guard Bases.
The voting is expected to wrap up later this week,
and the BRAC Commission has until September 8
to submit its recommendations to the President.
Once approved by the President, Congress will
conduct a final vote.
For a complete list of military bases and
installations slated for closure or realignment, visit
www.brac.gov.
BRAC from page 2
Stay Up-To-Date on Bills That
May Impact Your City
www.cacities.org/billsearch
Become a regular user of the League’s online
Legislative Tracking System. The League’s
website is your gateway to all the information
you need: bills sorted by subject areas, show-
ing the bill history, current status, committee
analyses, votes, and much more. You can
even view League letters of support or opposi-
tion, and access the League lobbyist working
on the bill.
2005 LEAGUE ANNUAL
CONFERENCE: OCTOBER 5-8,
MOSCONE CONVENTION
CENTER, SAN FRANCISCO
PLAN NOW TO ATTEND THE LEAGUE’S
2005 ANNUAL CONFERENCE THIS
FALL - THE FIRST TIME IT HAS BEEN IN
SAN FRANCISCO SINCE 1997.
Participate in this important gathering
of several thousand California city officials
as they set policies, expand their knowl-
edge and sharpen their skills to better
serve their cities.
Make you reservations through our
online system at www.cacities.org/ac.