Legislation Details

File #: HIST-10522    Version: 1 Subject:
Type: Historical Status: Consent Agenda
In control: City Council Meeting Agenda
On agenda: 2/9/2009 Final action: 2/9/2009
Title: League of California Cities Priority Focus Editions #3 dated January 23, 2009 and #4 dated January 30, 2009.
Attachments: 1. League of California Cities Priority Focus Edition - Priority Focus Issue #3 January 23, 2009.pdf, 2. League of California Cities Priority Focus Edition - Priority Focus Issue #4 January 30, 2009.pdf
IN THIS THIS ISSUE: January 23, 2009 Issue #3-2009 Upcoming Events: City Managers Department Meeting — Monterey, Feb. 4-6 Personnel & Employee Relations — San Francisco, Mar. 12-13 Public Works Officers Institute & Mini Expo — Monterey, Mar. 25-27 Planners Institute & Mini Expo — Anaheim, Mar. 25-27 Page 4: Find a Bill, Legislators, Leg Committee, or Ask League Leg Staff NEW ADMINISTRATION PROPOSAL TO DEFER LOCAL HIGHWAY USERS TAXES, PROPOSITION 42 FUNDS AND MANDATE REIMBURSEMENTS How Will Your City Services Be Affected? The League needs information quickly about how individual cities would be affected by a new proposal floated by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Department of Finance (D0F) to offset state cash flow woes. For more, see Page 2. LIGHT AT THE END OF THE BUDGET TUNNEL? As the budget deficit clock outside Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office this week ticked up to more than $8.4 billion, there was news this week that legislative Republicans may be willing to consider revenue increases in exchange for what they consider to be solid budget reforms that control future spending. For more, see Page 3. LEAGUE HONORS FOUR MEMBERS OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE Hundreds of city officials were in town this week to honor the four legislators the League recognized for their support of local government in 2008 at a special reception. The event was held at the Citizen Hotel in Sacramento following the first day of the 2009 New Mayors and Council Members Academy. For more, see Page 3.'Cash Flow' Continued from Page 1... Designed as part of a final budget package, the administration drafted legislation that would defer the payment of the following revenues to cities and counties: 1) Seven-Month deferral of Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) Funds: These are revenues paid monthly to cities and counties from the per-gallon motor vehicle fuel tax. The DOF proposal is to defer the payment of these funds to cities and counties in the following way: • Batch #1: Payments to cities and counties for revenues collected in January, February, March and the first half of April (that would otherwise be paid in February, March, April and May) would be instead paid in September 2009. We estimate this deferral would amount to about $162 million for counties and about $156 million for cities. • Batch #2: Payments to cities and counties for revenues collected during the second half of April, May, June and July (that would otherwise be paid in May, June, July and August) would be instead be paid in October 2009. We estimate this deferral would amount to about $165 million for counties and about $160 million for cities. 2) Three-Month Deferral of Proposition 42 Transportation Revenues: These revenues are paid quarterly to cities and counties from the state sales tax on gasoline. The DOF proposal is to defer payment of the June 2009 (fourth quarter) local government allocations until October 2009. This deferral would amount to about $68 million for counties and $68 million for cities. 3) Two-Month Delay for Mandate Payments: The DOF proposal delays the payment date for mandate claims from Aug. 15 to Oct. 16, 2009. 4) Seven-Month Deferral of State General Fund Aid to Counties: The DOE proposal also would defer state General Fund payments to counties for a variety of social service programs from February to August 2009. Current Proposal Mirrors 2008 Deferral. City officials will recall that in 2008 HUTA payments to cities and counties were deferred for the months of April, May, June, July and August and repaid in September (ABX 3 7, Chapter 5, Statues of 2008), with a total value to cities and counties of approximately $500 million. Language in that measure authorized Proposition 1B transportation dollars to be temporarily used to backfill losses, and also authorized the September repayment to be accrued during the 2007-08 fiscal year. While the DOF proposal includes similar accrual language and permits Prop. 1B funds to be used temporarily for HUTA and Prop. 42 purposes, it must be noted that Prop. 1B and other bond revenues are not being distributed by the state due to inability of the state to issue bonds. Please Tell Us ASAP: How Will Your City Services Be Affected? While cities were able to weather the 2008 deferral of HUTA funds, the dramatic decline of our economy has since forced cities to make many adjustments to their budgets. The League's fiscal consultant, Michael Coleman, has estimated the city-by-city impacts, available at httpliwwvv,raBiforniacityfinance.corni#CITY-STATE. We need your help to fully tell the story of how local services would be impacted by this proposal. Specifically, what would your city do to manage this proposed deferral of funds? What programs and projects would be affected? How will this affect your residents? Please send a brief response to Dorothy Johnson at diohnson(@cacities.arci by 5:00 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 27. 2/ League President Judy Mitchell thanks Assembly Member Tom Be hill for his work with cities durin • 2008. 'Budget' Continued from Page 1... Republicans have indicated for weeks that they would be willing to discuss revenue increases, but only after the Legislature has passed reforms that cut programs and limit future spending. The change is that the Republicans are signaling that they would be willing to vote for a comprehensive package that includes both tax increases and reforms. Quoted in the Sacramento Bee, Assemblyman Anthony Adams, R-Hesperia, said, "The reforms have to be there. (We must be able) to tell constituents, 'Look, we had to raise taxes, we had to go forward, but we've fundamentally altered the way in which Sacramento is going to be budgeted — and we will not have these problems again because of it.'" Administration Floats Proposal on Deferring Transportation and Mandate Payments to Local Agencies. The League is asking city officials to provide us with information on how their city would be affected by an administration proposal to defer payments to local agencies of local highway users taxes, Prop. 42 funds and mandate reimbursements. (Visit http://www.californiacityfinance.comittCITY-STATE for "New Administration Proposal to Defer Local Highway Users Taxes, Proposition 42 Funds and Mandate Reimbursements".) State Controller Chiang Refuses to Go Along with State Worker Furlough. Also this week, State Controller John Chiang announced that he would not cut state workers' paychecks as requested by the Governor, unless directed not to do so by the judge hearing a lawsuit brought by state workers. The lawsuit challenges the Governor's order to state workers to take off two days a month without pay. The controller's decision is welcome news to state workers, but eliminates a budget-cutting tool the Governor had hoped to use to minimize pressure on the state general fund. The Governor and "big four" legislative leaders were scheduled to meet today to continue budget discussions. Tax Reform Commission Begins Work. Also this week, the Commission on the 21st Century Economy held the first of three meetings yesterday in La Jolla to formulate a plan to overhaul California's tax system. The commission plans to focus on changes that will reduce the volatility in the state's revenue system, due in large part to the state's dependence on income taxes paid by a relative few high-income taxpayers. The commission will also consider extending the sales tax to services as a means of ensuring more long-term growth in its revenues and making the state less dependent on income taxes. 'Special Reception' Continued from Page 1... League President Judy Mitchell, Mayor of the city of Rolling Hills Estates, presented the awards honoring Assembly Member Tom Berryh ill (R-Modesto), former Assembly Member John Laird (D-Santa Cruz), Assembly Member Lori Saldaria (D-San Diego) and Sen. Lois Walk (D-Davis). All four were recognized for their leadership and support of local government during the 2008 legislative session. Assembly Member Berryhill was recognized for his response to metal theft, an issue that has been plaguing farmers in his Central Valley district as well as cities around the state. 3League President Judy Mitchell thanks former Assembly Member John Laird, now a member of the California Integrated Waste Management Board, for his work with cities. Former Assembly Member Laird was recognized for continuing to keep the needs of cities in mind during his work on the state budget, and for his efforts to pass his AB 2466. This law is important to local government because it generates additional public investment in renewable power by authorizing a public agency to receive full credit against its electric bill for any surplus power produced by an eligible renewable generating facility is a legacy for cities and the environment. Assembly Member Saldarla was honored for her balanced leadership as chair of the Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development. The League honor also recognizes her leadership in authoring AB 2280, which improves the functioning of Density Bonus Law, an incentive-based law designed to reward developers of affordable housing. Sen. Wolk was recognized for her solid support of local government during her six years in the California State Assembly. In 2008, then Assembly Member Wolk assisted cities with the passage of AB 642, which allows cities to use one firm to both design and build projects such as waste water facilities, solid waste management facilities or water recyding facilities. The four legislators were also featured in the January issue of Western City magazine, which can be accessed at www.westerncity.corn. Find a Bill, Legislators, Leg Committee, or Ask League Leg Staff Visit (and bookmark!) the League's Leciistative Resources Web page (www.cacities.orgilegresources). You'll find a roster and contact information for the League's legislative staff; the online Bill Search program, background materials on lobbying your legislators, and more.|1013| IN THIS ISSUE: January 30, 2009 Issue #4-2009 Page 7: Upcoming Legislative Hearing to Address Group Homes Page 8: 2009 League of California Cities Planners Institute, March 25 — 27 League Forms Water Task Force Page 9: Assembly Committee Appointments Announced Helen Putnam Awards: Celebrating Excellence in City Government Page 10: Find a Bill, Legislators, Leg Committee, or Ask League Leg Staff FEDERAL ECONOMIC STIMULUS PACKAGE PASSED BY HOUSE SENATE VERSION INTRODUCED Wednesday afternoon the U.S. House of Representatives passed their version of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Act) (HR 1 http://frwebgate.access.qoacioviccii- binigetdoc.cgi ?dbnarne=1 I 1 cong bills&docid=thl eh.txt, pdf) by a vote of 244-188. The cost of the package totals $819 billion, and consists of nearly $550 billion for upgrades to transportation, infrastructure, construction health care programs, education and housing assistance, and energy efficiency projects, and $275 billion in personal and business tax credits. For more, see Page 2. NO BUDGET DEAL There may be progress on the State budget, but it's not visible to the thousands of Capitol watchers waiting for news that a deal is near. "Big Five" discussions occurred several days this week. The pressure to reach a solution is growing, as the state approaches the beginning of February — the month that State Controller John Chiang identified as a time when he expects the state to run out of cash sufficient to pay all its bills. Without a budget solution, Chiang has said that some vendors will receive IOU's instead of actual payment, as he juggles the available funding to cover as many priority obligations as possible. For more, see Page 5. AB 32 IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE With the passage of the AB 32 Scoping Plan by the California State Air Resources Board (ARB) in December 2008 (see "Air Board Adopts Climate Change Scoping Plan" — Priority Focus, Dec. 12, 2008) we now begin the two year process to implement the proposals outlined in the plan. Yesterday, the ARB provided an updated timeline of those ideas for 2009 and beyond. For more, see Page 6.'Federal Stimulus' Continued from Page 1... The Act did not receive any support from House Republicans, who cited concerns with the cost of the plan, the transparency of the process, and whether tax cuts or spending would be more helpful to reviving the economy. General provisions of the Act include preferences for infrastructure projects that can be obligated within 120 days and unprecedented reporting and transparency requirements. Release of Senate Version The Senate released their version of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (S 336 htto://frwebaate.access.gpo.goviccji- binigetdoc.coi?dbname=111 corsq bills&docid =f:s336pcs.txt.pdf) late this week. At this time, the bill is not in print, and less is known about the specifics of the proposal. Next steps Senate committees are expected to hear the Senate version early next week and plan to have it considered before the full Senate by the end of the week. Following passage of the Act in the Senate, it will be sent to Conference, where the House and Senate will reconcile any differences in the bills. Below is a brief comparison of funding included in the Act that may be important to cities. These are preliminary numbers based on what we know of the two proposals, and does not include information on the distribution process for most funds. This information will continually be updated and refined as the Act is finalized. Please visit our Federal Economic Stimulus Updates webpage for information provided by the National League of Cities, as well as future information and full side-by-side comparisons of the House and Senate legislation. WATER/FLOOD PROTECTION Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations House: • $175 million to purchase and restore floodplain easements; and • $175 million for watershed and flood prevention projects Senate: • $275 million total Watershed Rehabilitation House: • $50 million Senate: • $120 million Rural Community Advancement Program House: • $1.5 billion for Rural Water and Waste Disposal Direct Loans Senate: • $1.37 billion for Rural Water and Waste Disposal Direct Loans Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund House: • $2 billion to states via formula to finance drinking water infrastructure improvements. States are required to use 50 percent of the amount of the grant in the form of a subsidy to municipalities, including forgiveness of principal, negative interest loans, and grants for projects included on the State's priority list. Senate: • $2 billion to the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund 2Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund House: • $6 billion to states via formula to finance publically-owned wastewater infrastructure improvements. States are required to use 50 percent of the funds as subsidies to municipalities for forgiveness of principal, negative interest loans, and grants for projects on the State's priority list Twenty percent (20%) is required to be used for projects to address water-efficiency goals, energy-efficiency goals, mitigate storm water runoff, or encourage environmentally sensitive project planning, design, and construction. Senate: • $4 billion for the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund PUBLIC SAFETY Wildfire Management House: • $300 million for hazardous fuel reduction, forest health, wood-to-energy grants, and rehabilitation and restoration activities on federal lands • $550 million for state fire assistance hazardous fuels projects, volunteer fire assistance, cooperative forest health projects, city forest enhancements, and wood-to-energy grants on state and private lands Senate: • $300 million for hazardous fuel reduction, forest health, wood-to-energy grants, and rehabilitation and restoration activities on federal lands • $350 million for state fire assistance hazardous fuels projects, volunteer fire assistance, cooperative forest health projects, city forest enhancements, and wood-to-energy grants on state and private lands Law Enforcement House: • $3 billion for Byrne JAG (formula) grants. These funds can be used for a variety of purposes, including equipment, operations and support for other associated law enforcement personnel (such as prosecutors, public defenders, etc.). These funds can also be used to pay overtime expenses of officers on multi-jurisdictional task forces. • $1 billion for competitive COPS hiring grant program to support the hiring of about 13,000 new police officers for three years. The grantee is responsible for at least 25 percent in matching funds and must commit to use its own funds to keep the officer on board for a fourth year. Senate: • $1.5 billion for Byrne JAG (formula) grants • $1 billion for competitive COPS hiring program • $100 million for State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (Southwest Border) • $150 million for State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (Rural) • $440 million for State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (Prevention, Intervention, and Prosecution) • $300 million for State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (Violence Against Women) • $100 million for State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (Victims Assistance) • $50 million for State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (Internet crimes against children) ENERGY Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy House: • $6.2 billion for the Weatherization Assistance Program • $3.5 billion for Energy Efficiency & Conservation Block Grants Senate: • $2.9 billion for the Weatherization Assistance Program • $4.7 billion for Energy Efficiency & Conservation Block Grants 3Institutional Loan Guarantee Program House: • $1 billion for loans to institutional entities for identifying, designing and implementing sustainable energy infrastructure projects and grants for energy efficiency innovative technologies projects on grounds and facilities of institutions. Local governments are included in the definition of institutions. Senate: • No funds for institutional loan guarantee program ENVIRONMENT Diesel Emissions Reduction Act House: • $300 million for grants and diesel emissions Senate: • $300 million for grants and diesel emissions Grants and Loans loans to states and loans to states and (new program) local governments for local governments for projects that reduce projects that reduce Brownfields House: • $100 million for site assessment and clean-up grants, revolving loan fund and job training Senate: • $100 million for site assessment and clean-up grants, revolving loan fund and job training TRANSPORTATION Airport Improvement Projects House: • $3 billion for grants. Grantees must enter into contracts or other binding commitments for no less than 50 percent of the funding within 120 days of enactment Senate: • $1.1 billion for grants Highway Infrastructure House: • $30 billion, $804 million of which will go to roads and roadways on Indian Reservations and national parks. • Funds will be distributed in the following manner:|109| 55 percent ($16.0588) directly to State DOTs 2. 45 percent ($13.13813) mirrors the Surface Transportation Program a. 10 percent ($1.3148) set aside for transportation enhancements b. 90 percent ($11.8248) split: 62.5 percent ($7.398 to MPOs) suballocated by population 37.5 percent ($4.4348) to State DOTs • Approximately half of the $30 billion is under a 120-day "use it or lose it requirement; if a state has not obligated half of its apportionment within 120 days the difference between the obligated amount and 50 percent will be taken back by FHWA and redistributed to other states. (note: Money suballocated to a MPO has a "use it or lose it" requirement 30 days shorter than the state requirement. If a MPO has not obligated at least 50 percent of its allocations within 90 days of allocation, it gives the money back to the state so that the state can obligate before the state's 120-day deadline. The same thing happens to the remaining half of the money on July 1.) • Priority will be given to projects that can award contracts within 120 days are included in an approved state and/or local TIP are projected for completion within a 3-year time frame and are located in economically distressed areas. 4Senate: • $27 billion for highways, streets, and roads investments. The majority of the funding will be distributed as grants using a formula set in current federal law, and will be distributed in two parts: Q The first half will be provided to state governments to be obligated within 180 days of distribution. o The second half will be split 20 percent to states, and 80 percent to regional transportation agencies. These funds must be obligated within one year of distribution. • $5.5 billion for competitive grants to state and regional governments for transportation investments. The projects are required to have a significant impact on the nation, a region, or a metropolitan area. Public Transit House: • $9 billion for supplemental grants for public transit investment • Grantees must enter into contracts or other binding commitments for no less than 50 percent of the funding within 120 days of enactment Senate: • $8.4 billion for public transportation. This funding will be distributed by formula to local areas using current federal formulas. The funds will be distributed in two parts, with requirements for the first half to be obligated within 180 days, and the second half to be obligated within one year of distribution. HOUSING/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Public Housing Capital Fund House: • $5 billion total. $4 billion will be distributed by formula, and $1 billion will be distributed through competitive grants to public housing authorities Senate: • $5 billion total Community Development Block Grants House: • $1 billion to be distributed using the FY 2008 distribution formula • Priority to be given to projects that can award contract within 120 days of receipt of funds Senate: • No funds for Community Development Block Grants Neighborhood Stabilization Program House: • $3,4 billion competitive grant program for state, local governments, and non-profits Senate: • $2.25 billion total MISCELLANEOUS Wireless and Broadband Deployment Grant Program (new program) House: • $1 billion for Wireless Deployment Grants • $1.8 billion for Broadband Deployment Grants • Eligible local governments are those who are, or intend to be, a provider of wireless voice service, advanced wireless broadband service, basic broadband service, or advanced broadband service. Senate: • No funds included for Wireless and Broadband Deployment Grants 5'State Budget' Continued from Page 1... Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Wins: State Worker Furloughs Can Proceed. The Governor won an important victory Wednesday, when a Sacramento superior court judge rejected arguments from two state employee unions that the Governor lacks the authority to furlough state workers as a means of reducing state costs. The judge said the state's current budget crisis and lack of funds represented an emergency and the Governor's order was "reasonable and necessary under the circumstances." He ordered the State Controller, who had sided with the unions and refused to cut state worker paychecks, to implement the Governor's plan by cuttings state workers' paychecks by ten percent. The move will save the state an estimated $1.3 billion. League Alerts Administration of Impacts of Local Funding Deferrals. Information provided by more than 40 cities this week made it possible for the League to provide information to the Governor's administration budget and transportation officials about specific local impacts that would likely occur if a plan to delay payments to local agencies of funds from several sources became part of the final budget-balancing package. As reported last week in Priority Focus, the proposal is defer local payments of Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) funds for seven months; Proposition 42 transportation funds for three months; and mandate payments for two months. The League asked cities to provide information on what impact these deferred payments would have on their ability to provide services. More than 40 cities responded, providing specific examples of how deferral of these funds will directly translate into local project delays. In a transmittal sent to administration officials, League Legislative Director Dan Carrigg wrote: "Several frustrated respondents described [the proposal as] an 'anti-economic stimulus.' For some cities this means waiting up to a year on street rehabilitation and for others, stopping construction on major infrastructure projects indefinitely because of the costs to stop construction and start again. Public works officers also point out that these delays will occur during the spring/summer construction period, and also at a time when they have been receiving lower bids that would allow these projects to be stretched further. In addition, some cities report a delay in HUTA payments would mean losing staff in their municipal public works/transportation departments." While sympathetic with the state's cash flow challenges, Carrigg urged the administration officials to consider approaches that minimize the amount of disruption cities would experience as they work to stimulate important economic activities at the local level. 'AB 32' Continued from Page 1... In 2009 and 2010, the focus of the climate change work at the ARB and other state agencies will be to adopt regulations implementing the Scoping Plan. ARB plans to continue to use their formal structure of public workshops, draft regulations and formal comment periods for these regulations. Under existing law, the regulations developed in the next two years, will go into effect no later than Jan. 1, 2012. The key requirements for any regulations developed in this process must meet the following: • Use open public process for new regulations • Minimize costs and maximize benefits • Protect low-income communities • Complement existing smog and air toxics programs • Minimize greenhouse gas emission leakage and administrative burdens The following measures contained within the ARB Soaping Plan and adopted by the ARB as itema.re evp.cted to go before the AR L=1:ioarci for adoption in 2009: 6_ .....• • • • ........................ ..: . S:cipping AB :•:.:32: ::.- :Key Scoping Plan Measure • • ............. ........ ... • ..... Mark 4gca :. • ,.... ...... . . Go vernment Implementation ... ... ...:. . : Projected Implement ation Date - .,..::.::.• •-• ..... ............. Million Tons of GhG Reductions by 2020 Type of Action (Regulation, Voluntary, etc) Link to Regulations Responsible Lead State Agency Projected Date Measure to be Adopted by Lead A gency Pavley tailpipe emissions (AB 1493) ARB Sep 2004 2009-2016 27.7 Regulation www.erb.ca.gov/rxiccrnst crns.htm Ship Electrification at Ports** ARB Dec 2007 2010 0.2 Regulation w-vmarb.cagoviportsishor epowerishorepower.htm Tire Pressure Program** ARB Feb 2009 2010 0.1 Regulation vvvvw.arb.cacloviccitire- pressureitire-pressure.htm Low Carbon Fuel Standard** ARB April 2009 2010 15 Regulation http:wacb.ca.qovifues flefslIcfs.htm Landfill Methane Control** ARB April 2009 2012 1 Regulation http://www.arb.ca.qoviccila adfjilsitprid.htm Green Buildings DGS, ARB, CEC, CPUC, HCD Ongoing unknown 26 NA i tt :11\p‘vw.b.ca our s d sidsidefault htrn Commercial Recycling CIWMB 2010 unknown 5 Mandate www.ciwrrib.ca .clovkiimate /Recyclinciidefaut.htm Regional Transportation Related Greenhouse Gas Targets ARB, Local Government Regional Planning Agencies Sep 2010 Set targets by 2010. 5 NA httro7www.arbxa.gov1ccirt acirtaahtm ARB- California State Air Resources Board CEC- California Energy Commission CPUC- California Public Utilities Commission DGS- California Department of General Services HCD- California Department of Housing and Community Development ** Discrete Early Action Items are required under AB 32 to be enacted and enforceable by January 1, 2010. A full timeline of all ARB implementation measures can be found at: http://wvvw,arboa.ciovicciscopinciplan/meetings/012909/sp measures implementation timeline 0 12909.pdf Upcoming Legislative Hearing to Address Group Homes Mark you calendars now for the Wednesday, Feb. 18 informational hearing of the Assembly Human Services Committee, from 1:30 — 5 p.m. at the State Capitol. The hearing will focus on siting of residential facilities for people with disabilities and children. The siting and location of residential group homes is a major concern for many of California's cities. The staff of the Assembly Human Services Committee has been working with League staff on the scope of the hearing, and quite a bit of thought and consideration has gone into the construction of the agenda. While the final agenda has yet to be released, the hearing will consist of several different issues presented by group homes. Topics to be addressed include perspectives from the State of California; local governments, including cities and counties; and providers of group homes. Local government participation is a critical portion of this hearing, especially with regard to the notion of local concerns, local planning efforts to address siting issues and potential future recommendations. While the League has identified a number of cities with experiences to share about the challenges of siting of group homes in neighborhoods, we are looking for additional examples, and possible witnesses to testify at such a hearing. Specific issues include over- concentration of group homes in neighborhoods, code violations, and disproportionate increases in public safety calls.If your city has examples to be shared, please contact League staff, Lucas Frerichs, at Ifrerichscadties.orq. 2009 League of California Cities Planners Institute, March 25-27 Don't miss out on this year's Planners Institute, filled with educational sessions designed to meet the priorities of planning professionals, as well as invaluable strategy sessions and networking opportunities. The Institute will be held on March 25-27 in Anaheim at the Marriott Hotel and Convention Center. You will want to attend if you are a: Planning Director, Redevelopment Director, Planning Commissioner, Planning Staff, Community Development Director, Mayor or Council Member Mark your calendar to come see Keynote Speaker Van Jones, the Founder/CEO of Green For All in Oakland. Jones testified before Congress at a hearing on Jan. 15 that focused on creating jobs and stimulating the economy through renewable energy and energy efficiency. Jones' testimony can be read at htto://www.greenforali.orq/blogigreen-for-aikestifies-before-congress-green-the- stimulus-and-create-a-clean-enercw-corps#testimony-before-the-select. Below are featured workshops you won't want to miss out on! • California Environmental Quality Act 101 (CEQA Basics) • Preparing and Adopting Effective General Plans • Using Prop 1C and Other State Funds to Achieve Housing Element Goals • Urban Design: What Cities Can Do for You and What You Can Do for Your City • Group Homes vs. The Neighborhood — Can They Get Along? • Planning Cities for a New Era • SB 375 — the intersection of Climate Change, Land Use and Transportation • Housing Elements and Housing Laws: What Every Commissioner Should Know • Development Blueprint: A Look at Mixed-Use in Downtown Anaheim • Practical Solutions for Production of Affordable Workforce Housing • Using Performance Measurement to Deliver Efficient, Quality Development Review Services • Best Practices in Local Affordable Multi-family Housing Preservation Strategies • Bridging the Gap: City Planning and Available Water Supplies Register online today at www.cacities.orgievents. The registration and housing deadline is Tuesday, March 3. You must first register online before you will be sent the link to reserve hotel nights. The Anaheim Marriott Hotel & Convention Center has lowered their housing price from $189 to $169 (plus applicable state & local taxes per room night). If you have already registered for the hotel, they will honor the lower price. League Forms Water Task Force Over the last year, water supply, conveyance, quality and conservation have been actively discussed at League meetings. Last summer, the League Board of Directors created a specific forum for consideration of water policy issues by approving a new Water Task Force. The scope of the new Task Force is broad: water supply, conveyance, conservation, quality, wastewater and stormwater. The board's direction to the Task Force is two-fold: first, what should be the League's involvement in statewide water policy discussions? Second, if the League should be involved, then should the Task Force develop policies or principles to assist in that involvement, to be voted on by League Policy Committees and the Board of Directors? There has been strong membership interest in the new task force, as indicated by the overwhelming number of city officials the League has received since last summer, requesting appointment to the group. The League has been reviewing and coordinating membership requests, and identifying topics for the task force to review. Recently, the Board Executive Committee voted to approve two members per League regional division as voting members and 8encourage all other interested city officials to participate, but not as voting members. Task force member selection was delegated to each regional division. The first Task Force meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, April 16 from 11 am. - 3 p.m., at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in Sacramento. This meeting will coincide but not conflict with the League's Legislative Action Days and League Board Meeting in Sacramento that day. If you have further questions or would like to participate on the Task Force, please contact your League Regional Public Affairs Manager. League Policy Analyst Lucas Frerichs (ifrerichscacifies.ora) or League Legislative Representative Kyra Ross (kross(acacities.arq) are also available to answer questions. Assembly Committee Appointments Announced Assembly Speaker Karen Bass this week announced her appointments to all Assembly legislative committees. The chairmanships had been announced the week of Jan. 16, but the information on the memberships of the various committees had not yet been made public. Senate committee chairs and members were announced by Sen. President Pro Tenn in December 2008. A listing of all Senate committee members can be found on the Senate Web site at http://vv-ww.senate.cagovi-nevvsenic.,ommitteesistanding.htp. Assembly committee members can be found on the Assembly Web site at http://www.assembly ,ca.goviacslacsframeset8text.asp. The following members will comprise the Senate and Assembly Local Government Committees. City officials should review these lists carefully and take note of members that represent their cities. You will want to maintain contact with these members about city issues and concerns in the weeks and months ahead. Assembly Local Government Committee Chair: Assembly Member Anna M. Caballero, D-Salinas Vice-Chair: Assembly Member Steve Knight, R- Palmdale Mike Davis, D - Los Angeles Michael Duvall, R- Brea Mary Hayashi, D - Hayward Paul Krekorian, D - Burbank Nancy Skinner, D - Berkeley Senate Local Government Committee Chair: Sen. Patricia Wiggins, D - Santa Rosa Vice Chair: Sen. Dave Cox, R - Fair Oaks Samuel Aanestad, R - Grass Valley Christin Kehoe, D - San Diego Lois Wolk, D - Davis Helen Putnam Awards: Celebrating Excellence in City Government Enter Your City's Innovative Program Today and Compete for Statewide Recognition Each year the League of California Cities honors outstanding work in cities across the state through the League Partner-sponsored Helen Putnam Awards for Excellence. If your city has done remarkable, innovative work in any of the 10 categories listed below now is the time to get your deserved recognition. It is an opportunity to thank your employees and collaborators, gain the appreciation of your residents and feel proud of outstanding contributions made to better your city. 9The award recognizes the successes of California cities as demonstrated by beneficial innovations, resourceful efficiencies, improved public service, and overall enhanced public trust and support. The award also provides a great opportunity to have a community celebration of the good work you are doing. Categories for the 2009 Helen Putnam Awards 1. Community Services and Economic Development 2. Enhancing Public Trust, Ethics and Community Involvement 3. Health and Wellness Programs 4. Housing Programs and Innovations 5. internal Administration 6. League Partners Award for Excellence in City-Business Relations 7. Planning and Environmental Quality 8. Public Safety 9. Public Works, Infrastructure and Transportation 10. Ruth Vreeland Award for Engaging Youth in City Government Additionally, this year will mark the first President's Advocacy Award. This prestigious award honors a distinguished program that best advocates for the League Board's annual strategic priorities. One outstanding winner will be chosen from the ten categories. Additionally, as in past years, a Cities, Counties and Schools (CCS) Partnership Award will be given to the applicant that exhibits a proven effort in demonstrating a culture of collaboration among local jurisdictions. The CCS Partnership is a collaboration of the League, California State Association of Counties and California School Boards Association. To qualify, simply demonstrate that your city offered a program or service that has proven measurable and successful within a minimum of one year of actual implementation. The submission deadline is April 9. For your convenience, applications and more information is also available at www.cacities.orWhelenputnam. New this year, applications can be submitted electronically. Find a Bill, Legislators, Leg Committee, or Ask League Leg Staff Visit (and bookmark!) the League's Legislative Resources Web page (www.cacities.orgilecresources). You'll find a roster and contact information for the League's legislative staff; the online Bill Search program, background materials on lobbying your legislators, and more. 10