TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Talyn Mirzakhanian, Acting City Manager
FROM:
George Gabriel, Assistant to the City Manager
Patricia Matson, Management Analyst
SUBJECT:Title
Update Regarding the City’s Legislative Positions on Bills from the Current Statewide Legislative Cycle (Acting City Manager Mirzakhanian).
(Estimated Time: 30 Mins.)
RECEIVE AND FILE
Body
_________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the update regarding the City’s legislative positions on bills from the current statewide legislative cycle.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications associated with the recommended action.
BACKGROUND:
The Manhattan Beach City Council periodically reviews bills, initiatives, or legislation pending in other governmental agencies. The purpose of this is to outline the position of the City Council on priority issues and matters that impact the City’s ability to operate effectively, promote City interests and protect local authority.
From time to time, staff identifies legislation that the City Council may want to indicate their position and join other cities that oppose or support certain pieces of legislation. All legislation the City Council has taken positions on is summarized on the City’s website here: <https://www.manhattanbeach.gov/government/city-council/legislative-positions>.
On March 5, 2024, the City Council adopted the 2024 Legislative Platform. This document sets forth the City’s legislative objectives for the 2024 calendar year and provides direction for legislative action. The Platform contains broad policy statements pertaining to a variety of issues that impact the City of Manhattan Beach and outlines a process for the City to take positions on legislation.
At the same Council meeting, the City Council established a Legislative Ad Hoc Subcommittee (assigning Mayor Pro Tem Howorth and Councilmember Lesser) which utilizes the Platform to make expedited decisions regarding the City’s position on new legislation.
At the most recent Legislative Ad Hoc Subcommittee meeting, the Councilmembers requested an update be provided to the entire Council on legislation the subcommittee has authorized positions on as well as the City’s sponsored legislation, Assembly Bill 2309.
DISCUSSION:
Assembly Bill 2309 Progress & Next Steps
On March 5, 2024, the City Council adopted a resolution sponsoring and supporting Assembly Bill 2309 which, at the time, would authorize the City Attorney of any general law or chartered city to prosecute State misdemeanors. The City engaged with lobbyist firm, Arc Strategies, to assist the City’s sponsorship of the bill and on April 23, 2024, the Police Chief and the Mayor spoke in support of the bill at a meeting of the State Assembly’s Committee on Public Safety in Sacramento. AB 2309 received co-author support from Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco and on May 13, the State Assembly voted by a margin of 50 in favor and 6 against to support bill passage of AB 2309.
Thereafter, the bill transitioned to the State Senate and specifically, the Senate Committee on Public Safety. To ensure passage of the bill, AB 2309 was amended significantly and narrowed the scope of the bill to obtain Committee approval of the bill. Most significantly, the bill was amended with the following summarized edits:
1. The prosecutorial authority granted to a city attorney will be limited to cases filed and adjudicated in designated collaborative justice courts (i.e. diversion programs) that provide rehabilitation and support services for criminal defendants to reduce recidivism;
2. The District Attorney of the County retains the authority to intervene at their discretion to serve as the primary or lead prosecutor for any misdemeanor committed within the city arising out of violation of state law; and
3. A City will be responsible for all costs associated with the rehabilitation and supports services program, not the court costs.
Given the Council’s Work Plan item to begin a homelessness diversion program, the City has gained state misdemeanor crimes it can now utilize during prosecution that were previously dismissed. Prior to this bill, it did not offer the City any authority to pursue misdemeanor crimes that were more prevalent amongst our homeless population, most notably, public intoxication. Should the City begin a homeless diversion program, the City now has the authority to pursue these crimes, albeit under a diversion program. Costs for such a program remain a concern and staff may return to the Council to discuss this further.
AB 2309 was then referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee upon successfully making it through Senate policy committee deliberations last month. With the Legislature’s return from Summer Recess on August 4th, the Appropriations Committees have been steadily meeting to refer fiscal bills to their respective Suspense Files - a holding place for all fiscal measures used to calculate the total cost of each House’s legislative agendas. The Suspense Files for the Assembly and Senate will be heard on August 15th. Suspense File hearings are non-deliberative, with no presentations or debates - the Chair of each Appropriations Committee will simply lists the outcomes of hundreds of accumulated bills, including AB 2309.
The Senate Appropriations Committee analysis noted fiscal impacts to trial courts and possible local reimbursable mandates, although our advocates have pushed back on the latter since the bill is voluntary. However, given the near $50 Billion total budget deficit this year, and numerous bills impacting court costs, AB 2309 will face the same challenges and cost-pressures created by the State’s current budget situation.
At the time this staff report was drafted, the Senate Committee on Approriations meeting had not been held. Once Council meets on August 20, 2024, staff will know if AB 2309 passed the Committee.
Legislative Positions Taken by the City via the Legislative Ad Hoc Subcommittee
Since the inception of the Legislative Ad Hoc Subcommittee, several position letters have been authorized in accordance with the adopted 2024 Legislative Platform. The following is the City’s position and a brief summary of each bill at the time the letter was submitted:
Letter of Support
1. Assembly Bill 2234 (Boerner) Vehicles: Electric Bicycles.
Bill Summary: Establishes the “San Diego Electric Bicycle Safety Pilot Program” and authorizes a local authority within the County of San Diego, or the County of San Diego in unincorporated areas, to adopt an ordinance or resolution that would prohibit a person under 12 years of age from operating a class 1 or 2 electric bicycle. Additionally, 60 days after adoption of the ordinance or resolution the bill would make a violation an infraction punishable by either a fine of $25 or completion of an electric bicycle safety and training course.
The League of CA Cities supports this bill.
Letters of Opposition
1. Assembly Bill 1886 (Alvarez) Housing Element Law: Substantial Compliance: Housing Accountability Act.
Bill Summary: This bill would remove a fundamental provision of housing element law that allows a city to disagree with the State Department of Housing and Community Development, explain why its housing element is in substantial compliance with the law, and then adopt the housing element which is thereafter considered “in substantial compliance with housing element law.”
The League of CA Cities opposes this bill.
2. Assembly Bill 2560 (Alvarez) Density Bonus Law: California Coastal Act of 1976.
Bill Summary: This bill would provide that, in the coastal zone, the Density Bonus Law does not relieve a project from the requirement to obtain a coastal development permit, as specified. The bill would require any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled to be permitted in a manner that is consistent with the Density Bonus Law and does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access, as specified. Existing law requires each local government within the coastal zone to prepare a local coastal program and specifies that a local coastal program is not required to include housing policies and programs. This bill would repeal that provision and instead require, on or by July 1, 2026, any local government in the coastal zone to submit an amendment to the local government’s local coastal program that harmonizes the Density Bonus Law and the California Coastal Act, as specified. The bill would require this amendment to be processed as de minimis, as specified, if certain conditions are met. By requiring local governments to submit an amendment to its local coastal program, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The League of CA Cities opposes this bill.
A second letter of opposition was sent regarding this bill after amendments were made.
3. Assembly Bill 3093 (Ward) Land Use: Housing Element: Streamlined Multifamily Housing
Bill Summary: The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development that includes, among other things, a housing element. That law defines various terms for purposes of requirements applicable to the housing element. Under existing law, a housing element is required to include specified information, including an analysis of special housing needs, such as those of the elderly, and quantification of the locality’s existing and projected housing needs for all income levels, including extremely low income households. This bill would define acutely low, extremely low, very low, lower, moderate, and above moderate income for purposes of requirements applicable to the housing element, and would make related changes. The bill would modify the specified information required to be included in the housing element, including by removing the calculation method for extremely low income households and by specifying acutely and extremely low income households as a special housing need for the 7th and subsequent revisions of the housing element.
The League of CA Cities opposes this bill unless amendments are made.
4. Senate Bill 951 (Wiener) California Coastal Act of 1976: Coastal Zone: Coastal Development.
Bill Summary: This bill would, for a jurisdiction within the coastal zone that has not identified adequate sites to accommodate the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, require completion of any necessary local coastal program amendments related to land use designations, changes in intensity of land use, zoning ordinances, or zoning district maps, as specified. By imposing new duties on local governments regarding the administration of housing elements, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The League of CA Cities originally opposed this bill but has since taken a neutral position after amendments were made.
5. Senate Bill 1037 (Wiener) Planning and Zoning: Housing Element: Enforcement.
Bill Summary: Would allow the Attorney General to take legal action against a city and seek fines up to $50K a month for failure to adopt a compliant housing element or if the city does not follow state laws that require ministerial approval of certain housing projects.
The League of CA Cities opposes this bill.
Additionally, the Subcommittee directed staff to return at a future City Council meeting with a report and consideration of a resolution supporting Proposition 36 which will ask voters to change parts of Proposition 47, an initiative measure that passed in 2014 which reclassified specific offenses. Proposition 36 proposes to allow felony charges and increases sentences for certain drug and theft crimes.
Information pertaining to the City’s positions on legislation is posted to the City’s Legislative Positions webpage and includes bill status updates, position letters, and links to the California Legislative Information website for the full text of the proposed bills.
Notable Events Remaining in the 2024 State Legislative Cycle
As indicated earlier, the State Legislature reconvened from a summer recess on August 5, 2024, and each house has until August 31, 2024, to pass bills. The Governor then has until September 30, 2024, to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the update regarding the City’s legislative positions on bills from the current statewide legislative cycle.
PUBLIC OUTREACH:
After analysis, staff determined that public outreach was not required for this issue.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The City Council's consideration of an update regarding the City’s legislative positions is not a “project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines because it does not have a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA, and no environmental review is necessary.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney has reviewed this report and determined that no additional legal analysis is necessary.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. AB 2309 (Amended as of July 3, 2024)
2. AB 2234 - Letter of Support
3. AB 1886 - Letter of Opposition
4. AB 2560 - Letters of Opposition
5. AB 3093 - Letter of Opposition
6. SB 951 - Letter of Opposition
7. SB 1037 - Letter of Opposition