Legislation Details

File #: HIST-2464    Version: 1 Subject:
Type: Historical Status: Action Item
In control: City Council Meeting Agenda
On agenda: 5/8/2006 Final action: 5/8/2006
Title: Opinion re Appointments to Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority.
Attachments: 1. A-2__Council memo re MTA Expo Authority.doc
9770 CULVER BOULEVARD CULVER CITY, CA 90232-0507 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: 05/04/2006 TO: MAYOR SILBIGER AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Carol Schwab, City Attorney SUBJECT: A-2 Opinion re Appointments to Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority CC: Jerry Fulwood, CAO Martin Cole, ACAO Steve Cunningham, Transportation Director Susan Evans, Community Development Director Our office, with the assistance of other departments, has completed its review of the issue raised at the April 24, 2006, City Council meeting relating to the length of the terms for Culver City’s representative and alternate to the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority (“Authority”). Our research has confirmed the interpretation, which I expressed Monday night, that the City Council has the authority under the statute [Public Utilities Code Section 132615(a)] to appoint and/or replace its representative and alternate to the Authority. In addition, Section 132615(b) stating that a member’s term is “not more than four years,” gives clear language and direction and is supported by the legislative history. As directed, City staff contacted the Senate Office of the bill’s author, Senator Sheila Kuehl, requesting clarification of the intent of the legislation (SB 504). Her office replied “Although the legislation establishes 4 year terms, it is always up to the appointing authority to change their designated appointee before the 4 years are up.” A search of the legislative history, including Senate Transportation Committee Reports, found consistent references to the “not more than 4 years” language. We also do not believe that the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, stating “a member is appointed to terms of 4 years,” creates a conflict, as it is a summary of the legislation and does not take away the Council’s ultimate authority. Even if a conflict could be found, the Legislative Counsel’s opinion, although given respect, is not binding. As further requested by Council, we researched the Legislative Counsel’s authority. In reviewing the Legislative Counsel’s website, we found that the Legislative Counsel is appointed by a concurrent resolution of the State Senate FILE NAME: $ASQPDF103936.DOC PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER and Assembly. (Government Code Section 10201.) Their role is to “assist the Legislature, the Governor, and other state officers by providing legal services relating to the legislative process. [They] draft legislation, render legal opinions, provide counsel to the Members and committees of the Legislature, and represent the Legislature in litigation…” The Legislative Counsel is not a judicial position, and her opinion, while useful, is not binding on the courts and does not have precedential value. As stated above, our Office concludes that the City Council has the authority to appoint and/or replace representatives to the Authority, prior to the expiration of a four-year term.