RPVCCA_CC_SR_2013_09_03_02_League_of_CA_Cities_2013_Annual_Conference_ResosCITY OF
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CAROLYNN PETRU, AICP, DEPUTY GITY MANAGER~
SEPTEMBER 3, 2013
SUBJECT: LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 2013
CONFERENCE RESOLUTIONS
REVIEWED BY: CAROLYN LEHR, CITY MANAGER G9--
Staff Coordinator: Kit Fox, AICP, Senior Administrative Analyst@
RECOMMENDATION
ANNUAL
1) Authorize the City Council's Voting Delegate to support the adoption of League of
California Cities General Assembly Resolution No. 1 (Water Bond Funds); and,
2) Authorize the City Council's Voting Delegate to support the adoption of League of
California Cities General Assembly Resolution No. 2 (Public Safety
Realignment), with recommended amendments; and authorize Staff to send
letters to the League's Regional Public Affairs Manager and the Chair of the
Public Safety Policy Committee in advance of the conference.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The League of California Cities 2013 Annual Conference is being held September 18-
20, 2013, in Sacramento. At the annual conference, the League General Assembly will
consider two (2) resolutions at the annual business meeting. Staff recommends that the
City Council authorize the City's Voting Delegate and/or Alternate to support the
adoption of League of California Cities General Assembly Resolution Nos. 1 and 2,
provided that Resolution No. 2 is amended to protect the interests of cities that contract
for law enforcement services.
BACKGROUND
The League of California Cities (League) 2013 Annual Conference is being held
September 18-20, 2013, at the Sacramento Convention Center, Sheraton Grand Hotel
and Hyatt Regency Hotel in Sacramento. At the annual conference, the League
General Assembly will consider two (2) resolutions at the annual business meeting on
September 20, 2013. The City Council is encouraged to review the resolutions and
2-1
MEMORANDUM: League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolutions
September 3, 2013
Page2
determine a City position on each so that the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Voting
Delegate (i.e., Councilman Campbell) may most effectively represent and convey the
City's position on each resolution.
As the City Council may recall, the League recently amended its by-laws to require the
concurrence of at least five (5) cities or city officials in order to place a resolution before
the General Assembly for consideration. This year's conference will be the first time
that resolutions have been submitted for consideration under the new League by-laws.
Policy development is a vital and on-going process within the League. The principal
means for deciding policy on the important issues facing cities and the League is
through the League's eight (8) standing Policy Committees 1 and the Board of Directors.
The process allows for timely consideration of issues in a changing environment and
assures city officials the opportunity to both initiate and influence policy decisions.
Annual conference resolutions constitute an additional way to develop League policy.
DISCUSSION
Each Resolution has been reviewed by Staff to identify any potential impact upon the
City. A brief description of each Resolution and Staff's recommendation is provided
below. The full text of each of the two (2) Resolutions is attached to this report, along
with related background information provided by the Resolution sponsors and League
Staff.
1. Resolution Calling Upon the Governor and the Legislature to Work with the
League of California Cities in Providing Adequate Funding and to Prioritize
Water Bonds to Assist Local Government in Water Conservation, Ground
Water Recharge and Reuse of Stormwater and Urban Runoff Programs
The Los Angeles County Division proposes a Resolution that would call upon the State
Legislature and the Governor to work with the League of California Cities in providing
adequate funding and to prioritize water bonds to assist local governments in water
conservation, ground water recharge and reuse of stormwater and urban runoff
programs. The Resolution is endorsed by the cities of Alhambra, Cerritos, Claremont,
Glendora, Lakewood, La Mirada, La Verne, Norwalk and Signal Hill; Mary Ann Lutz,
Mayor of the City of Monrovia; and the California Contract Cities Association.
As the City Council is aware, recent changes in the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permitting process and Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) programs are expected to significantly increase the City's costs for maintaining
water quality compliance in the coming years. In 2009, the State Legislature passed
1 Of the two (2) resolutions presented for consideration at this year's conference, Resolution No.
1 will be referred to the Environmental Quality Policy Committee, and Resolution No. 2 will be referred to
the Public Safety Policy Committee, prior to their consideration by the General Assembly.
2-2
MEMORANDUM: League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolutions
September 3, 2013
Page3
and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a package of legislation that included four
(4) policy bills and an $11.1 billion water bond (The Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water
Supply Act). A substantial portion of this funding could assist California cities in
achieving compliance with increasingly stringent water quality regulations. The water
bond was originally scheduled to appear on the November 2010 statewide ballot, but it
has been twice postponed by the State Legislature. Although the water bond is
tentatively scheduled to appear on the November 2014 statewide ballot, it is not clear at
this time whether or will or not.
The purpose of the proposed Resolution is to encourage the State Legislature and the
Governor, who are purportedly considering projects for the water bond-a portion of
which could be directed to assist local government in funding and implementing the
goals of the Clean Water Act and the State's water objectives of conserving and reusing
stormwater in order to improve water supply and reliability-to take positive steps to
expedite the distribution of the water bond proceeds to California's cities. The City of
Rancho Palos Verdes stands to benefit from the availability of State funding for water-
quality enhancement projects. Therefore, Staff believes that it is in the City's interest to
support 2013 League of California Cities General Assembly Resolution No. 1.
Recommendation: Staff recommends supporting the adoption of 2013 League of
California Cities General Assembly Resolution No. 1.
2. Resolution Calling Upon the Governor and Legislature to Enter Into
Discussions with the League and California Police Chiefs' Association
Representatives to Identify and Enact Strategies that will Ensure the
Success of Public Safety Realignment from a Local Municipal Law
Enforcement Perspective
The League's Public Safety Committee proposes a Resolution that seeks to outline the
deficiencies in the State's current public safety realignment policy, as implemented in
2011 by AB 109, and to identify policy changes that will assist State, county and
municipal law enforcement entities to cope with the expanded universe of offenders that
are now being directed to county facilities, resulting in increased related impacts on both
local communities and municipal law enforcement. The Resolution is endorsed by the
cities of Arroyo Grande, Covina, Fontana, Glendora, Monrovia, Ontario, Pismo Beach
and Santa Barbara.
As described in the Resolution, the key issues relating to the impacts of realignment
that need to be addressed include:
1. The need to fully fund municipal police departments with constitutionally-
protected funding to appropriately address realignment issues facing front-line
law enforcement;
2-3
MEMORANDUM: League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolutions
September 3, 2013
Page4
2. Amend appropriate sections of AB 109 to change the criteria justifying the
release of non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offender inmates (N3) inmates to
include their total criminal and mental history instead of only their last criminal
conviction;
3. Establish a uniform definition of recidivism with the input of all criminal justice
stakeholders throughout the state;
4. Enact legislation that will accommodate the option for city police officers to make
10-day "flash incarcerations" in city jails for probationers who violate the
conditions of their probation;
5. Establish oversight procedures to encourage transparency and accountability
over the use of realignment funding;
6. Implement the recommendations identified in the California Little Hoover
Commission Report No. 216, dated May 30, 2013;
7. Provide for greater representation of city officials on the local Community
Corrections Partnerships. Currently AB 117 provides for only one city official (a
police chief) on the seven-member body, six (6) of which are aligned with the
county in which the partnership has been established. As a result, the counties
dominate the committees and the subsequent distribution of realignment funds.
8. Provide, either administratively or by legislation, an effective statewide data-
sharing mechanism allowing state and local law enforcement agencies to rapidly
and efficiently share offender information to assist in tracking and monitoring the
activities of AB 109 and other offenders.
The League analysis of the Resolution describes the sponsors' increased concerns
"about municipal public safety impacts resulting from county jail overcrowding, a
problem that has intensified with realignment, resulting in certain categories of offenders
doing no jail time or being sentenced to time served." The League goes on to note "a
growing body of anecdotal evidence that property crimes have correspondingly
increased." Finally, the League observes that "[increased] criminal activity has strained
the resources of many local police departments already struggling to more closely
coordinate information sharing with county probation offices to effectively monitor
offenders on post-community release supervision."
Staff asked Lomita Sheriff's Station Captain Blaine Bolin to review a'nd comment upon
the proposed Resolution. Although Captain Bolin generally concurred with or had no
objection to most of the provisions of the Resolution, he did raise some issues that are
worthy of the City Council's consideration:
• As currently drafted, the Resolution calls for full funding of "municipal police
departments." The Sheriff's Department is concerned that such action would
reduce realignment funding for counties or disenfranchise cities with contract law
enforcement services. The actions recommended in the Resolution would
reward independent cities and punish contract cities as it assumes-incorrectly-
that the Sheriff's Department can use "county realignment" funds to pay for
2-4
MEMORANDUM: League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolutions
September 3, 2013
Page 5
contract city police services or for any police services, as it does in the
unincorporated areas. Realignment funding is to provide funding for jail and
probation services, as well as health, mental health, drug and alcohol treatment,
housing and other services. If funding for "front-line law enforcement" is sought,
it ought to apply to all agencies that provide police services, and it must be an
additional pot of money with an independent, dedicated revenue source.
• The Sheriff's Department supports the concept of 10-day "flash incarcerations"
for probation violations. However, it should be noted that the decision to flash
incarcerate is up to probation officers, not deputies or police officers. It should
also be noted that the vast majority of city jails are "Type I" jails, which can only
hold individuals for a maximum of forty-eight (48) hours. The Legislature cannot
change rules pertaining to jail "type" and duration of occupancy; this must be
done by regulations set by the Board of State and Community Corrections. The
Sheriff's Department has been and is supporting legislation to allow probation
officers to use city police jails that are of the right "type" to house those on flash
incarceration (i.e., "Type II" jails).
• The Sheriff's Department cautions cities to be careful about getting what they
wished for in asking for greater participation in the local Community Corrections
Partnerships. It should be noted that realignment also burdened Los Angeles
County with additional duties such as providing mental health services, welfare
services, "CalFresh" services (i.e., food stamps) and a host of other things
besides jail and probation. Currently, the cities do not have any additional
responsibilities as a result of realignment, and the Sheriff's Department
presumes that cities likely do not want or have the resources to take on the
responsibility for any portion of these additional services.
Although direct connections to realignment cannot be conclusively drawn at this time,
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes has certainly observed "anecdotal" evidence of
increased residential and vehicle property crimes in some neighborhoods in recent
years. Staff believes that the issues raised in the proposed Resolution deserve
responses from the Governor and State Legislature. Therefore, Staff believes that it is
in the City's interest to support 2013 League of California Cities General Assembly
Resolution No. 2, provided that it is amended to:
1. Ensure that full-service cities do not benefit at the expense of contract cities and
the county agencies that provide law enforcement services to them;
2. Provide for the use of 10-day "flash incarceration" for probation violations without
unduly burdening the very limited "Type II" jail facilities that are legally able to
house inmates for more than forty-eight (48) hours; and,
3. Enhance the presence and role of city officials in Community Corrections
Partnerships, but without obligating cities to assume greater responsibility for
realignment services.
2-5
MEMORANDUM: League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolutions
September 3, 2013
Page 6
As mentioned above, this Resolution will be reviewed by the League's Public Safety
Policy Committee before it is presented by the General Assembly. In order to ensure
that the City Council's concerns are conveyed to the Committee during its deliberations,
Staff suggests that it would be appropriate to send letters to the League's Regional
Public Affairs Manager and the Chair of the Public Safety Policy Committee that
articulate the City Council's concerns about this Resolution as far in advance of the
General Assembly vote as possible.
Recommendation: Staff recommends supporting the adoption of 2013 League of
California Cities General Assembly Resolution No. 2, with
recommended amendments.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
If the City Council desires for Staff to further research issues related to either of these
resolutions before providing direction to the Voting Delegate, this item may be continued
to the City Council meeting of September 17, 2013. Although the League conference
begins on September 18, 2013, the General Assembly does not convene until noon on
September 20, 2013.
Attachments:
• 2013 League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolutions
M:\Legislative lssues\League of California Cities\20130903_AnnualConferenceResolutions_StaffRpt.doc
2-6
I
I
lls'"A IC .~ ... · . · .. ·. nnua .·· · onJerence
Sacramento
September 18 -20, 2013
2-7
INFORMATION AND PROCEDURES
RESOLUTIONS CONTAINED IN TIDS PACKET: The League bylaws provide that resolutions shall
be referred by the president to an appropriate policy committee for review and recommendation.
Resolutions with committee recommendations shall then be considered by the General Resolutions
Committee at the Annual Conference.
This year, two resolutions have been introduced for consideration by the Annual Conference and referred
to the League policy committees.
POLICY COMMITTEES: Two policy committees will meet at the Annual Conference to consider and take
action on resolutions referred to them. The committees are Environmental Quality and Public Safety. These
committees will meet on Wednesday, September 18, 2013, at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in Sacramento. The
sponsors of the resolutions have been notified of the time and location of the meetings.
GENERAL RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE: This committee will meet at 1 :00 p.m. on Thursday,
September 19, at the Sacramento Convention Center, to consider the reports of the two policy committees
regarding the two resolutions. This committee includes one representative from each of the League's regional
divisions, functional departments and standing policy committees, as well as other individuals appointed by the
League president. Please check in at the registration desk for room location. ·
ANNUAL LUNCHEON/BUSINESS MEETING/GENERAL ASSEMBLY: This meeting will be held at
12:00 p.m. on Friday, September 20, at the Hyatt Regency Hotel.
PETITIONED RESOLUTIONS: For those issues that develop after the normal 60-day deadline, a
resolution may be introduced at the Annual Conference with a petition signed by designated voting
delegates of 10 percent of all member cities ( 4 7 valid signatures required) and presented to the Voting
Delegates Desk at least 24 hours prior to the time set for convening the Annual Business Session of the
General Assembly. This year, that deadline is 12:00 p.m., Thursday, September 19. If the petitioned
resolution is substantially similar in substance to a resolution already under consideration, the petitioned
resolution may be disqualified by the General Resolutions Committee.
Resolutions can be viewed on the League's Web site: www .cacities.org/resolutions.
Any questions concerning the resolutions procedures may be directed to Meg Desmond at the League
office: mdesmond@cacities.org or (916) 658-8224
1 2-8
GUIDELINES FOR ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTIONS
Policy development is a vital and ongoing process within the League. The principal means for deciding policy
on the important issues facing cities is through the League's eight standing policy committees and the board of
directors. The process allows for timely consideration of issues in a changing environment and assures city
officials the opportunity to both initiate and influence policy decisions.
Annual conference resolutions constitute an additional way to develop League policy. Resolutions should
adhere to the following criteria.
Guidelines for Annual Conference Resolutions
1. Only issues that have a direct bearing on municipal affairs should be considered or adopted at the
Annual Conference.
2. The issue is not of a purely local or regional concern.
3. The recommended policy should not simply restate existing League policy.
4. The resolution should be directed at achieving one of the following objectives:
(a) Focus public or media attention on an issue of major importance to cities.
(b) Establish a new direction for League policy by establishing general principals around which
more detailed policies may be developed by policy committees and the board of directors.
( c) Consider important issues not adequately addressed by the policy committees and board of
directors.
(d) Amend the League bylaws (requires 2/3 vote at General Assembly).
2 2-9
LOCATION OF MEETINGS
Policy Committee Meetings
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Sheraton Grand Hotel
1230 J Street, Sacramento
Public Safety:
Environmental Quality:
9:00 a.m. -10:30 a.m.
10:30 a.m. -12:00 p.m.
General Resolutions Committee
Thursday, September 19, 2013, 1:00 p.m.
Sacramento Convention Center
1400 J Street, Sacramento
Annual Business Meeting and General Assembly Luncheon
Friday, September 20, 2013, 12:00 p.m.
Hyatt Regency Hotel
1209 L Street, Sacramento
3 2-10
KEY TO ACTIONS TAKEN ON RESOLUTIONS
Resolutions have been grouped by policy committees to which they have been assigned.
Number Key Word Index Reviewing Body Action
1 2 3
1 -Policy Committee Recommendation
to General Resolutions Committee
2 -General Resolutions Committee
3 -General Assembly
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICY COMMITTEE
1 2 3
1 Water Bond Funds
PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY COMMITTEE
2 3
2
Information pertaining to the Annual Conference Resolutions will also be posted on each committee's
page on the League website: www.cacities.org. The entire Resolutions Packet will be posted at:
www .cacities.org/resolutions.
4 2-11
KEY TO ACTIONS TAKEN ON RESOLUTIONS (Continued)
KEY TO REVIEWING BODIES
1. Policy Committee
2. General Resolutions Committee
3. General Assembly
Action Footnotes
* Subject matter covered in another resolution
**Existing League policy
***Local authority presently exists
"
KEY TO ACTIONS TAKEN
A -Approve
D -Disapprove
N -No Action
R -Refer to appropriate policy committee for
study
a -Amend
Aa -Approve as amended
Aaa -Approve with additional amendment( s)
Ra -Amend and refer as amended to
appropriate policy committee for study
Raa -Additional amendments and refer
Da -Amend (for clarity or brevity) and
Disapprove
Na -Amend (for clarity or brevity) and take
No Action
W -Withdrawn by Sponsor
Procedural Note: Resolutions that are approved by the General Resolutions Committee, as well as all
qualified petitioned resolutions, are reported to the floor of the General Assembly. In addition, League policy
provides the following procedure for resolutions approved by League policy committees but not approved by
the General Resolutions Committee:
Resolutions initially recommended for approval and adoption by all the League policy committees to which
the resolution is assigned, but subsequently recommended for disapproval, referral or no action by the
General Resolutions Committee, shall then be placed on a consent agenda for consideration by the General
Assembly. The consent agenda shall include a brief description of the basis for the recommendations by
both the policy committee(s) and General Resolutions Committee, as well as the recommended action by
each. Any voting delegate may make a motion to pull a resolution from the consent agenda in order to
request the opportunity to fully debate the resolution. If, upon a majority vote of the General Assembly, the
request for debate is approved, the General Assembly shall have the opportunity to debate and subsequently
vote on the resolution.
5 2-12
2013 ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION REFERRED TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICY COMMITTEE
1. RESOLUTION CALLING UPON THE GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE TO WORK
WITH THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES IN PROVIDING ADEQUATE FUNDING
AND TO PRIORITIZE WATER BONDS TO ASSIST LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN WATER
CONSERVATION, GROUND WATER RECHARGE AND REUSE OF STORMW ATER AND
URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAMS.
Source: Los Angeles County Division
Concurrence of five or more cities/city officials: Cities of Alhambra; Cerritos; Claremont; Glendora;
Lakewood; La Mirada; La Verne; Norwalk; Signal Hill; Mary Ann Lutz, Mayor, city of Monrovia.
Referred to: Environmental Quality Policy Committee
Recommendations to General Resolutions Committee: Approve
WHEREAS, local governments play a critical role in providing water conservation, ground water
recharge and reuse of stormwater infrastructure, including capture and reuse of stormwater for their citizens,
businesses and institutions; and
WHEREAS, local governments support the goals of the Clean Water Act to ensure safe, clean
water supply for all and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has encouraged local governments to
implement programs to capture, infiltrate and treat stormwater and urban runoff with the use of low impact
development ordinances, green street policies and programs to increase the local ground water supply
through stormwater capture and infiltration programs; and
WHEREAS, local governments also support the State's water quality objectives, specifically
Section 13241ofthe Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, on the need to maximize the use of
reclaimed and water reuse and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards and the State Water Resources
Board encourage rainwater capture efforts; and
WHEREAS, the State's actions working through the water boards, supported by substantial
Federal, State and local investments, have led to a dramatic decrease in water pollution from wastewater
treatment plants and other so-called "point sources" since 1972. However, the current threats to the State's
water quality are far more difficult to solve, even as the demand for clean water increases from a growing
population and an economically important agricultural industry; and
WHEREAS, the State's Little Hoover Commission found in 2009 that more than 30,000 stormwater
discharges are subject to permits regulating large and small cities, counties, construction sites and industry.
The Commission found that a diverse group of water users -the military, small and large businesses, home
builders and local governments and more -face enormous costs as they try to control and limit stormwater
pollution. The Commission concluded that the costs of stormwater clean up are enormous and that the costs
of stormwater pollution are greater, as beach closures impact the State's economy and environmental
damage threatens to impair wildlife; and
WHEREAS, at the same time that new programs and projects to improve water quality are
currently being required by the U.S. EPA and the State under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits and the Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) programs, many local governments
find that they lack the basic infrastructure to capture, infiltrate and reuse stormwater and cities are facing
difficult economic challenges while Federal and State financial assistance has been reduced due to the
impacts of the recession and slow economic recovery; and
6 2-13
WHEREAS, cities have seen their costs with the new NPDES permit requirements double and
triple in size in the past year, with additional costs anticipated in future years. Additionally, many local
businesses have grown increasingly concerned about the costs of retrofitting their properties to meet
stormwater and runoff requirements required under the NPDES permits and TMDL programs; and
WHEREAS, the League of California Cities adopted water polices in March of 2012, recognizing
that the development and operation of water supply, flood control and storm water management, among
other water functions, is frequently beyond the capacity of local areas to finance and the League found that
since most facilities have widespread benefits, it has become the tradition for Federal, State and local
governments to share their costs (XIV, Financial Considerations); and the League supports legislation
providing funding for stormwater and other water programs; and
WHEREAS, the Governor and the Legislature are currently contemplating projects for a water
bond and a portion of the bond could be directed to assist local government in funding and implementing the
goals of th~ Clean Water Act and the State's water objectives of conserving and reusing stormwater in order
to improve the supply and reliability of water supply; and now therefore let it be
RESOLVED by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, assembled in Sacramento
on September 20, 2013, that the League calls for the Governor and the Legislature to work with the League
and other stakeholders to provide adequate funding for water conservation, ground water recharge and
capture and reuse of stormwater and runoff in the water bond issue and to prioritize future water bonds to
assist local governments in funding these programs. The League will work with its member cities to educate
federal and state officials to the challenges facing local governments in providing for programs to capture,
infiltrate and reuse stormwater and urban runoff.
////////II
Background Information on Resolution No.1
Source: Los Angeles County Division
Background:
fu order to meet the goals of both the Federal Clean Water Act and the State's Porter-Cologne Water
Quality Control Ac~, which seek to ensure safe clean water supplies, cities provide critical water
conservation, groUn.d water recharge and reuse of stormwater infrastructure, including capture and reuse of
stormwater for their citizens, businesses and institutions.
Working with the State's Regional Water Quality Control Boards and the State Water Resources Board
through the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting process and Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Programs, California's cities implement programs to capture, infiltrate and
treat stormwater and urban runoff with the use of low impact development ordinances, green streets policies
and other programs to increase the local ground water supply.
These actions have led to a dramatic decrease in water pollution from wastewater treatment plants and other
so-called "point sources" since the adoption of the Clean Water Act in 1972. However, current threats to the
State's "non-point sources" of pollution, such as stormwater and urban runoff are far more difficult to solve,
even as the demand for clean water increases from a growing population and an economically important
agricultural industry.
7 2-14
Current Problem Facing California's Cities
The Little Hoover Commission found in 2009 that more than 30,000 stormwater discharges are subject to
permits regulating large and small cities, counties, construction sites and industry. The Commission found
that a diverse group of water users -the military, small and large businesses, home builders and local
governments and more -face enormous costs as they try and control and limit stormwater pollution. The
Commission concluded that the costs of stormwater clean up are enormous and that the costs of stormwater
pollution are greater as beach closures impact the state's economy and environmental damage threatens to
impair wildlife.
Additionally, new programs and projects to improve water quality are currently being required by the U.S.
EPA and the State under the NPDES permits and the TMDL programs. Many local governments find that
they lack the basic infrastructure to capture, infiltrate and reuse stormwater and the cities are facing difficult
economic challenges while Federal and State financial assistance has been reduced due to the impacts of the
recession and slow economic recovery.
Cities havt( seen their costs with the new NPDES permit requirements triple in size in the past year, with
additional costs anticipated in future years. Additionally, many local businesses have grown increasingly
concerned about the costs of retrofitting their properties to meet stormwater and runoff requirements
required under the NPDES permits and TMDL programs.
In Los Angeles County alone, reports commissioned by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District
estimate the costs of achieving region-wide compliance for implementing TMDL programs in the NPDES
permits required by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) will be in the
tens of billions of dollars over the next twenty years. Additionally, failure to comply with the LARWQCB's
terms could result in significant Clean Water Act fines, state fines and federal penalties anywhere from
$3,000-$37,500 per day. Violations can also result in third-party litigation. Such costs are not confined to
Los Angeles County and are being realized statewide.
Clearly, compliance with the NPDES permit and TMDL programs will be expensive for local governments
over a long period of time and cities lack a stable, long-term, dedicated local funding source to address this
need. Many cities are faced with the choice of either cutting existing services or finding new sources of
revenue to fund the NPDES and TMDL programs.
Los Angeles County Division Resolution
The Division suppqrts strong League education and advocacy at both the State and Federal levels to help
cities face the challenges in providing programs to capture, infiltrate and reuse stormwater and urban runoff.
While Los Angeles County cities and other regions seek to secure local funding sources to meet the Clean
Water Act and the State's water objectives, it will simply not be enough to meet the enormous costs of
compliance. The Los Angeles County Division strongly believes that State and Federal cooperation are
necessary to fund programs to secure and reuse stormwater in order to improve water supply and reliability
throughout the state.
The Division calls for the League to engage in discussions on 2014 State Water Bond to assist cities in
funding and implementing the goals of the Clean Water Act and the State's Water objectives. This
resolution does not support the 2014 bond issue, since the League and individual cities will need to make
this decision at a later time upon review of the final language. However, the Governor and Legislature have
reopened discussions for the 2014 water bond and funding of urban runoff and stormwater programs has
taken a back seat in past bond issues, such as Proposition 84. In May, Assembly Speaker John Perez
appointed a Water Bond Working Group which recently outlined a new set of Priorities and Accountability
Measures for developing a water bond that would gain the support of 2/3 of the Legislature and voters. One
of the priorities identified by the committee included, "Regional Self Reliance/Integrated Regional Water
8 2-15
Management," posing the question if stormwater capture should be included in any future bonds. The
Division believes the opportunity to advocate for funding in the bond is now.
/Ill/Ill//
League of California Cities Staff Analysis on Resolution No. 1
Staff: Jason Rhine; (916) 658-8264
Committee: Environmental Quality
Summary:
This resolution seeks to call upon the Governor and the Legislature to work with the League of California
Cities in providing adequate funding and to prioritize water bonds to assist local governments in water
conservation, ground water recharge and reuse of stormwater and urban runoff programs.
Background:
In 2009, the State Legislature passed and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a package of legislation
that included four policy bills and an $11.1 billion water bond (The Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water
Supply Act). The water bond included the following major spending proposals:
• $455 million for drought relief projects, disadvantaged communities, small community wastewater
treatment improvements and safe drinking water revolving fund
• $1.4 billion for "integrated regional water management projects"
• $2.25 billion for projects that "support delta sustainability options"
• $3 billion for water storage projects
• $1. 7 billion for ecosystem and watershed protection and restoration projects in 21 watersheds
• $1 billion for groundwater protection and cleanup
• $1.25 billion for "water recycling and advanced treatment technology projects"
The $11.1 billion bond also included nearly $2 billion in earmarks. Projects slated for funding included:
• $40 million to educate the public about California's water
• $100 million for a Lake Tahoe Environmental Improvement Program for watershed restoration, bike
trails and public access and recreation projects
• $75 million for the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, for public access, education and interpretive
projects
• $20 million for the Baldwin Hills Conservancy to be used to buy more land
• $20 million for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands for interpretive projects for visitors
The water bond was originally scheduled to appear on the 2010 ballot as Proposition 18. However, due to
significant criticism over the size of the bond, the amount of earmarked projects, and a lack of public
support, the Legislature has voted twice to postpone the ballot vote. The water bond is now slated for the
November 4, 2014 ballot.
It is unclear whether or not the water bond will actually appear on the November 2014 ballot. In recent
months, pressure has been mounting to postpone the water bond yet again or significantly rewrite the water
bond to drastically reduce the overall size of the bond and remove all earmarks. The Legislature has until
the summer of2014 to act.
Fiscal Impact:
Unknown. This resolution does not seek a specified appropriation from a water bond.
9 2-16
Existing League Policy:
In 2008, the League formed a new Water Task Force to consider updates and revision to the Water
Guidelines the League drafted and adopted 20 years earlier. These new Guidelines were formally approved
by the League board of directors in Feb. 2010. Below are the most pertinent policy and guiding principles
related to the proposed resolution. To view the entire water policy guidelines, go to
www .cacities.org/waterpolicyguidelines.
General Principles
• The League supports the development of additional groundwater and surface water storage,
including proposed surface storage projects now under study if they are determined to be feasible,
including but not limited to: environmentally, economically, and geographically relating to point of
origin. Appropriate funding sources could include, but are not limited to user fees, bonds and federal
funding.
• The League supports state water policy that allows undertaking aggressive water conservation and
water use efficiency while preserving, and not diminishing, public and constitutional water rights.
Water Conservation
• The League supports the development of a statewide goal to reduce water use by 20% by 2020
through the implementation of fair and equitable measures consistent with these principles.
• Accomplishing water conservation and water use efficiency goals will require statewide action by
all water users, including residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural water users, local and
regional planning agencies, state and federal agencies, chambers of commerce, and business,
commercial and industrial professional and trade associations.
Water Recycling
• Wherever feasible, water recycling should be practiced in urban, industrial and agricultural sectors.
This includes increasing the use of recycled water over 2002 levels by at least one million acre-
feet/year (afy) by 2020 and by at least two million afy by 2030.
• Increased recycling, reuse and other refinements in water management practices should be included
in all water supply programs.
Water Storage
• The development of additional surface facilities and use of groundwater basins to store surface
water that is surplus to that needed to maintain State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) Bay-
Delta estuary water quality standards should be supported.
Groundwater
• The principle that local entities within groundwater basins (i.e., cities, counties, special districts, and
the regional water quality control boards) working cooperatively should be responsible for and
involved in developing and implementing basin wide groundwater, basin management plans should
be supported. The plans should include, but not be limited to: a) protecting groundwater quality; b)
identifying means to correct groundwater overdraft; c) implementing better irrigation techniques; d)
increasing water reclamation and reuse; and e) refining water conservation and other management
practices.
• Financial assistance from state and federal governments should be made available to requesting
local agencies to develop and implement their groundwater management plans.
Financial Considerations
• It is recognized that the development and operation of water supply, water conveyance, flood control
and stormwater management, water storage, and wastewater treatment facilities is frequently beyond
the capability of local areas to finance;
10 2-17
• The League supports legislation to provide funding for stormwater, water and wastewater programs,
including a constitutional amendment which would place stormwater fees in the category of water
and wastewater fees, for the purposes of Proposition 218 compliance.
Support:
New this year, any resolutions submitted to the General Assembly must be concurred in by five cities or by
city officials from at least five or more cities. Those submitting resolutions were asked to provide written
documentation of concurrence. The following letters of concurrence were received: cities of Alhambra;
Cerritos; Claremont; Glendora; Lakewood; La Mirada; La Verne; Norwalk; Signal Hill; and Mary Ann Lutz,
Mayor, city of Monrovia. A letter of support was also
1
received from the. California Contract Cities ·
Association.
RESOLUTION REFERRED TO PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY COMMITTEE
2. RESOLUTION CALLING UPON THE GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE TO ENTER INTO
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE LEAGUE AND CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS' ASSOCIATION
REPRESENTATIVES TO IDENTIFY AND ENACT STRATEGIES THAT WILL ENSURE THE
SUCCESS OF PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT FROM A LOCAL MUNICIPAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE.
Source: Public Safety Policy Committee
Concurrence of five or more cities/city officials: Cities of Arroyo Grande, Covina; Fontana; Glendora;
Monrovia; Ontario; Pismo Beach; and Santa Barbara
Referred to: Public Safety Policy Committee
Recommendation to General Resolutions Committee: Approve
WHEREAS, in October 2011 the Governor proposed the realignment of public safety responsibilities
from state prisons to local government as a way to address recent court orders in response to litigation
related to state prison overcrowding, and to reduce state expenditures; and
WHEREAS, the Governor stated that realignment needed to be fully funded with a constitutionally
protected source of funds if it were to succeed; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature enacted the realignment measures, AB 109 and AB 117, and the
Governor signed them into law without full constitutionally protected funding and liability protection for
stakeholders; and
WHEREAS, California currently has insufficient jail space, probation officers, housing and job
placement programs, medical and mental health facilities, lacks a uniform definition of recidivism; and
utilizes inappropriate convictions used to determine inmate eligibility for participation in the realignment
program; and
WHEREAS, since the implementation of realignment there have been numerous issues identified that
have not been properly addressed that significantly impact municipal police departments' efforts to
successfully implement realignment; and
WHEREAS, ultimately many of these probationers who have severe mental illness are released into
communities where they continue to commit crimes that impact the safety of community members and drain
the resources of probation departments and police departments throughout the state; and
11 2-18
WHEREAS, an estimated 30 counties were operating under court-ordered or self-imposed population
caps before realignment, and the current lack of bed space in county jails has since led to many convicted
probationers being released early after serving a fraction of their time; with inadequate to no subsequent
supervision, leaving them free to engage in further criminal offenses in our local cities; and
WHEREAS, there is increasing knowledge among the offender population which offenses will and
will not result in a sentence to state prison, and many offenders, if held in custody pending trial, that would
be sentenced to county jail are ultimately sentenced to time served due to overcrowding in county facilities;
and
WHEREAS, there are inadequate databases allowing local police departments to share critical
offender information among themselves, with county probation departments, and with other county and state
law enforcement entities; and
WHEREAS, local police departments have not received adequate funding to properly address this new
populatio~ of offenders who are victimizing California communities; and now therefore let it be
RESOLVED by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, assembled in Sacramento
on September 20, 2013, to request the Governor and State Legislature to immediately enter into discussions
with League representatives and the California Police Chiefs' Association to address the following issues:
1. The need to fully fund municipal police departments with constitutionally protected funding to
appropriately address realignment issues facing front-line law enforcement;
2. Amend appropriate sections of AB 109 to change the criteria justifying the release of non-violent,
non-serious, non-sex offender inmates (N3) inmates to include their total criminal and mental
history instead of only their last criminal conviction;
3. Establish a uniform definition of recidivism with the input of all criminal justice stakeholders
throughout the state;
4. Enact legislation that will accommodate the option for city police officers to make ten (10) day flash
incarcerations in city jails for probationers who violate the conditions of their probation;
5. Establish o;versight procedures to encourage transparency and accountability over the use of
realignment funding;
6. Implement the recommendations identified in the California Little Hoover Commission Report #216
dated May 30, 2013;
7. Provide for greater representation of city officials on the local Community Corrections Partnerships.
Currently AB 117 provides for only one city official (a police chief) on the seven-member body, six
of which are aligned with the county in which the partnership has been established. As a result, the
counties dominate the committees and the subsequent distribution of realignment funds.
8. Provide, either administratively or by legislation, an effective statewide data sharing mechanism
allowing state and local law enforcement agencies to rapidly and efficiently share offender
information to assist in tracking and monitoring the activities of AB 109 and other offenders.
/l//llllll
12 2-19
Background Information on Resolution No. 2
Source: Public Safety Policy Committee
Background:
In October 2011 the Governor proposed the realignment of public safety tasks from State Prisons to local
government as a way to address certain judicial orders dealing with State prison overcrowding and to reduce
State expenditures. This program shifts the prisoner burden from State prisons to local counties and cities.
When the Governor signed into law realignment he stated that realignment needed to be fully funded with
constitutionally protected source of funds to succeed. Nonetheless, the law was implemented without full
constitutional protected funding for counties and cities; insufficient liability protections to local agencies;
jail space; probation officers; housing and job placement programs; medical and mental health facilities; and
with an inappropriate definition ofN3 (non-serious, non-sexual, non-violent) criminal convictions used to
screen inmates for participation in the program.
Two-thirds of California's 58 counties are already under some form of mandated early release. Currently, 20
counties have to comply with maximum population capacity limits enforced by court order, while another 12
counties have self-imposed population caps to avoid lawsuits.
At this time no one knows what the full impact of realignment will ultimately be on crime. We hope that
crime will continue to drop, but with the current experience of the 40,000 offenders realigned since October
2011, and an estimated additional 12,000 offenders being shifted from State prison to local jails and
community supervision by the end of fiscal year 2013-14, it will be very difficult to realize lower crime rates
in the future.
Beginning in October 2011, California State prisons began moving N3 offenders into county jails, the
county probation and court systems, and ultimately funneled them into community supervision or alternative
sentencing program in cities where they will live, work, and commit crime.
Note: There is currently no uniform definition of recidivism throughout the state and no database that can
deliver statistical information on the overall impact realignment has had on all cities in California. Because
of this problem we have used data from Los Angeles County.
The March 4, 2013,report to the Los Angeles County Criminal Justice Coordination Committee (CCJCC)
shows a strong effort and progress in addressing the realignment mandate. However, there is insufficient
funding.
The report also states the jail population continues to be heavily influenced by participants housed locally.
On September 30, 2012, the inmate count in the Los Angeles County Jail was 15,463; on January 31, 2013,
the count was 18,864. The realignment population accounted for 32% oftheJail population; 5,743 offenders
sentenced per Penal Code Section 1170 (h) and 408 parole violations.
By the end of January 2013, 13,535 offenders were released on Post Release Community Supervision
(PRCS) to Los Angeles County including prisoners with the highest maintenance costs because of medical
and drug problems and mental health issues costing counties and local cities millions of dollars in unfunded
mandates since the beginning of the program. Prisoners with prior histories of violent crimes are also being
released without proper supervision. That is why sections of AB 109 must be amended to change the
criteria used to justify the release of N3 inmates to include an offender's total criminal and mental
history instead of only their last criminal conviction. Using the latter as the key criteria does not provide
13 2-20
an accurate risk assessment of the threat these offenders pose to society if they are realigned to county
facilities, or placed on Post Release Community Supervision.
Chief Jerry Powers from the Los Angeles County Probation Department recently stated the release criteria
for N3 offenders "has nothing to do with reality." He said initially the State estimated the population of
released PRCS offenders would be 50% High Risk, 25% Medium Risk and 25% Low Risk. The reality is
3% are Very High Risk, 55% are High Risk, 40% are Medium Risk and only 2% are Low Risk offenders. He
said the High Risk and serious mentally ill offenders being released "are a very scary population." One of
the special needs offenders takes the resources of 20-30 other offenders.
Assistant Sheriff Terri McDonald who is the county Jail Administrator recently stated the Jail has only 30
beds for mentally ill offenders being released -when in fact she actually needs 300 beds to accommodate
the volume of serious mentally ill offenders being released that require beds.
Los Angeles County data shows 7,200 released offenders have had some sort of revocation. This number is
expected to increase because of a significant increase in the first four months of year two of realignment that
totals 83%, of the entire first year of the program; 4,300 warrants were issued for offenders; 6,200 offenders
have been rearrested; and 1,400 prosecuted. Data reveals one in 10 offenders will test positive for drugs
during the first 72 hours after being released knowing they are required to report to a probation officer
during that time. Only one in three offenders will successfully complete probation.
There are more than 500 felony crimes that qualify State prison inmates for release under realignment. They
will be spending their time in cities with little, if any, supervision.
I/I/II/Ill
League of California Cities Staff Analysis on Resolution No. 2
Staff: Tim Cromartie (916) 658-8252
Committee: Public Safety Policy Committee
Summary:
This Resolution seeks to outline the deficiencies in the State's current public safety realignment policy, as
implemented in 2011 by AB 109, and to identify policy changes that will assist State, county and municipal
law enforcement entities to cope with the expanded universe of offenders that are now being directed to
county facilities, re,sulting in increased related impacts on both local communities and municipal law
enforcement.
Background:
This resolution was brought to the Public Safety Policy Committee by individual members of that committee
who are increasingly concerned about municipal public safety impacts resulting from county jail
overcrowding, a problem that has intensified with realignment, resulting in certain categories of offenders
doing no jail time or being sentenced to time served. This has created a climate in which some offenses
receive little or no jail time, accompanied by a growing body of anecdotal evidence that property crimes
have correspondingly increased, with some, such as auto theft, being committed in serial fashion. Increased
criminal activity has strained the resources of many local police departments already struggling to more
closely coordinate information sharing with county probation offices to effectively monitor offenders on
post-community release supervision.
In addition, there is growing concern about the criteria established for determining which offenders are
eligible for post-release community supervision (the non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offenders). There is
so much concern that a May 2013 report of California's Little Hoover Commission recommended adjusting
14 2-21
the criteria to examine an offender's total criminal history rather than merely his or her last known offense,
as a means of more accurately assessing the risk he or she might pose to the community.
hnplementation of the realignment policy is handled in part by the Community Corrections Partnerships
established by AB 109, which currently have only one city representative, compared to at least four county-
level representatives.
Fiscal Impact:
Unknown impact on the State General Fund. This resolution seeks to establish increased and
constitutionally protected funding for city police departments (and county sheriffs departments, to the
degree they are contracted to provide police services for cities), but does not specify a dollar amount for the
revenue stream. At a minimum, it would entail an annual revenue stream of at least the amount provided for
cities for front-line law enforcement in the State's 2013-14 Budget, $27.5 million, indefinitely-although
that revenue stream has never been formally identified by the Brown Administration as having any direct
connection to realignment.
Existing League Policy:
Related to this resolution, existing policy provides:
• The League supports policies establishing restrictions on the early release of state inmates for the
purpose of alleviating overcrowding, and limiting parole hearing opportunities for state inmates
serving a life sentence, or paroled inmates with a violation.
• The League supports increasing municipal representation on and participation in the Community
Corrections Partnerships, which are charged with developing local corrections plans.
• In addition, the Strategic Priorities for 2012, as adopted by the League Board of Directors, included
the promotion oflocal control for strong cities. The resolution's objectives oflocking in ongoing
funding for front-line municipal law enforcement, and increasing city participation in the
Community Corrections Partnerships, are consistent with promoting local control.
Support:
New this year, any resolutions submitted to the General Assembly must be concurred in by five cities or by
city officials from at least five or more cities. Those submitting resolutions were asked to provide written
documentation of concurrence. The following cities/city officials have concurred: cities of Arroyo Grande;
Covina; Fontana; Glendora; Monrovia; Ontario; Pismo Beach; and Santa Barbara.
15 2-22
LETTERS OF CONCURRENCE
Resolution #1
Water Bond Funds
16 2-23
Gateway
10 the
San Gabriel Valley
fl I
South First Street
Alhambra
Cal(jbrnia
91801
626
570-5010
FAX
281-2248
0
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
City of Alhambra
Office of the Mayor and City Council
July 1, 2013
Bill Bogaard
President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
The City of Alhambra supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to
submit a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the
League's 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities
working to meet the State's water quality objectives and storm water
management plans by providing direction for the League to educate state
leaders and advocate for funding during discussions on the 2014 Water
Bond. The City of Alhambra is anticipating spending $24, 101.96 this year to
start the development of the Enhanced Watershed Plan and monitoring plan.
Priorto 2016, the City anticipates spending $1, 169,000forfull capture device
on our storm drain catch basins. In the future, it is estimated the city may
need $34 million dollars to finance the required infrastructure to meet the
new permit guidelines. We also anticipate needing to hire additional staff to
monitor and maintain the program. None of these costs have a dedicated
funding source.
As members of the League, our city values the policy development process
provided to the General Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue.
Please feel free to contact Mary Chavez, Director of Public Works, at (626)
570-5067 if you have any questions.
Very truly yours, *f 1>WL,"s
Steven Placido, DDS
Mayor
cc: Jennifer Quan, League of California Cities
17 2-24
Of'flCF-01•" Tlit: MAYOR
61UiCI:; W. BARROWS
Bill B9gaard
President
CIVIC CENTER. l H 125 BLOOM fl EU) AVrnue
P.O. l'>OX .3130 • CERRlTOS, CALIFORNIA 90703..:51:.50
Pl'IONE: (562) 916-1310 • fAX: {562i '+68-l095
CELL l'liONr:: (562) 51!7-1732
E-mail: bbarr90703@aol.com
WWW. CERRITOS. US
July 8, 2013
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Los Angeles ~our:if Division Annual Conference Resolution
Preslde~d:/fr
Cerritos
All-America City
'Ill'.'
2008
The City of Cerritos supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a
resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual
Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to
meet the State's water quality objectives and storm water management plans by
providing direction for the League to educate state leaders and advocate for funding
during discussions on tt1e 2014 Water Bond. The City of Cerritos expended $866,000 In
the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 for compliance with required stormwater programs. Future
expenditures are expected to be over $1.5 million annually, as the City will be required
to begin construction of costly stormwater capital improvements.
As members of the League our city values the policy development process provided to
the Genera! Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please feel free to
contact Art Gallucci, City Manager at (562)916-1301 or agallucci@cerritos.us, if you
have any questions.
Bruce W. Barrows
MAYOR
cc: Ling-Ling Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division c/o
Robb Korinke, Executive Director, Los Angeles County Division, robb@lacities.org
18 2-25
CITY OF CLAREMONT
City Hall
207 Harvard Avenue
P.O. Box 880
Claremont, CA 9i7ii-0880
Fax: (909)399-5492
Website: www.ci.claremont.ca.us
Email: contact@ci.claremont.ca.us
July 1, 2013
Bill Bogaard
President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
President Bogaard:
City Council • (909) 399-5444
Corey Calaycay
Joseph M. Lyons
Opanyi K. Nasiali
Sam Pedroza
Larry Schroeder
RE: Los Angeles County Division Proposed Resolution for LCC Approval
At The 2013 Annual Conference
The City of Claremont supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a
resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual
Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to
meet the State's water quality objectives and storm water management plans by
providing direction for the League to educate state leaders and advocate for funding
during discussions on the 2014 Water Bond.
As members of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to
the General As&embly and appreciates your time on this issue. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact Tony Ramos, City Manager, at (909) 399-5441.
Sincerely,
{jfcNa.AA~ .
Opanyi Nasiali
Mayor
c: Jennifer Quan, League of California Cities
v:trMoreno/Citv C-0uncil/letters/LCC Annual Conf Approval ttr·ON·July'13
19 2-26
CITY OF GLEN'DOH.A CITY HALL 914-8200
Ll6 East Foothill Blvd., Glendora, California 91741
w1Nvv.ci.glend0ra.,:a.us
July 15,2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of Califomia Cities
1400 K Street. Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95&14
RE: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution
President Bogaard:
The City of Glendora supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a resolution
for consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual Conference in
Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to meet the
State's water quality objectives and stonn water management plans by providing direction for
the League to educate state leaders and advocate for funding during discussions on the 2014
Water Bond.
As members of the League our city values the policy development process provided to the
General Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please feel free to contact me, if
YOI.! have any questions.
Sincerely,
,.//')
/ i
( /,y.< '·~·--~ ..... ~ . I
I
Joe Santoro, Mayor
cc: Ling-Ling Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division c/o Robb Korinke,
Executive Director, Los Angeles County Division, robb@lacities.org
Jennifer Quan, Regional Public Affairs Manager, League of Califomia Cities -
jquan@cacities.org
PRIDE or~ THE FOOTHILLS
20 2-27
'lhiM lhlgel'S
'i/k~~ fVJ!ayor
f'Jt.·~~~tie Du!Jo~~;
Co·~.HH.:H l\''ii!.niibt~~,,
July 2, 2013
Mr. Bill Bogaard
President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
Jeff \:~/ood
c~.~u:nri;:il l.\-1~,Hth~.~-t'
Ro~}. iFi~t:t.:Jm
C-m1Hif1:1.~ r\11.em!h~~li
RE: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution -Support
Dear President Bogaard:
The City of Lakewood supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a
resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual
Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities v1.1orking to
meet the State's water quality objectives and storm water management p~ans by
providing direction for the League to educate state leaders and advocate for funding
during discussions on the 2014 VVater Bond
For Lakewood, the initial cost alone to prepare the Watershed Management Plan
(WMP), Coordinated Integrated Management Plan (CIMP), and Reasonable Assurance
Modeling for the three watersheds that Lakewood 1s a part of is estimated to be
$153, 167. This cost does not include administration costs. monitoring costs,
construction costs, or inspection costs, which are estimated to be in the millions of
dollars.
As members of the League our citv values the policy dEntPiopmi::mt pr0r:e<::<::; provid~d to
the General Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please feel free to
contact Paolo Beltran, Senior Management Analyst, at (562) 866-9771, extension 2140,
or email at pbeltran@lakewoodcitv.org, if you have any questions.
~tvl--
Steve Croft
Mayor
cc: Ling-Ling Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division c/o
Robb Korinke, Executive Director. Los Angeles County Division,
robb@lacities.org
2-28
CITY OF LA MIRADA
DEDIC/.\TED TO .SERVICE
July 15, 2013
Bill Bogaard
President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
13700 L..a !vhrada noukvani
La !v!iradn. .. C'alih·irnia 9iJ6~~g
L-•l 1V1ii·adr.t. ('aiif~)rnia 9(}6.'.~/ ... ng2x
Phone: ( Sti~n 94.1-U 1 JI Fax: { 562) 9 .. ,r~--1 :.lh4
W\.V\v.c ilyofla1r1 i r::idi1.org
LETTER OF SUPPORT
SUBJECT: LOS ANGELES COUNTY DIVISION ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTION
Dear Presi?ent Bogaard:
On behalf of the City of La Mirada, I am writing to express support for the League of California
Cities, Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a resolution for consideration by the
League's General Assembly at the September 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for local governments working
to meet Federal and State objectives to protect water resources and storm water management
plans. The resolution also provides direction for the League to educate State leaders and
advocates for the inclusion of storm water funding in the State's proposed 2014 Water Bond.
Like many cities, the City of La Mirada does not have the basic infrastructure to capture, filter,
and reuse storm water, and Federal and State funding to assist in providing this infrastructure
has been reduced in recent years as a result of the economic recession. Compliance with the
MS-4 permit and other storm water regulations could cost the City millions, and reduce funding
for other vital City services such as infrastructure and public safety. The City could also face
steep fines, penalties, and third party lawsuits if it is unable to meet the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit requirements. Receiving State funding could
help alleviate the financial burden placed on local governments to meet storm water
requirements.
As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to the
General Assembly. Please contact Jeff Boynton, Deputy City Manager, at (562) 943-0131 if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
CITY OF LA MIRADA
~~M~•-
Steve De Ruse
Mayor
TER:jb:vdr
cc: Ling-Ling Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division
Robb Korinke, Executive Director, Los Angeles County Division
Lawrence P. Mmvles
.:vfnynr Pro l"-l'.fn
Pauline De:212
i..'oun·:·ilfni:..•1-r1i."i;;~r
Steve Jones
{ :nun(ilrncmbcr
Andre\v Sarega
c-~)1ln<.'.'.iI1nt."lll he1
Thornas E. Robinson
C'Hy \.rhHn'ig..:·r 2-29
SISTER CITIES
A·C~mlm~[}; lvff!~i~~J
Etchmiadzir1, Armenitt
s.~o/~1!~~s.1. 0~;1.·~.e
July 2, 2013
CITY OF LA VERNE
CITY HALL
3660 "D" Street, La Verne, California 91750-3599
www.ci.la-verne.ca.us
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution
President Bogaard:
The City of La Verne supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a
resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual
Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to
meet the State's water quality objectives and storm water management plans by
providing direction fo~ the League to educate state leaders and advocate for funding
during discussions on the 2014 Water Bond. While the City is still in the process of
identifying the costs associated with meeting the new requirements of the MS-4
PERMIT, it is expected these measures will far exceed existing local resources.
As members of the League, our city values the policy development process provided
to the General Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please feel free to
contact our City Manager, Bob Russi at 909-596-8726, if you have any questions.
cc: Jennifer Quan, League of California Cities
JR Ranells, Senior Management Analyst
U:\My Doc1;ments\CITY COUNCIL\D KENDRICK\Support 2013 League Conf Reso.doc
General Administration 909/596-8726 " Water Customer Service 909/596-8'744 • Parks & Community Services 909/596-8700
Public Works 909/596 .. 8741 .. Finance 909/596-8716 • Community Development 909/596-8706 • Building 909/596-8713
Pol ice Department 909/596-1913 .. Fiili3Department 909/596-5991 " General Fax 909/596-8737 2-30
LUIGI VERNOLA
Mayor
MARCEL RODARTE
Vice Mayor
CHERT KELLEY
Councilmember
MICHAEL MENDEZ
Councilmember
LEONARD SHRYOCK
Councilmember
MICHAEL J. EGAN
City Manager
12700 NORWALK BLVD., P.O. BOX 1030, NORWALK, CA 90651-·1030 *PHONE: 562/929-5700 * FACSIMlLE: 562/929 .. 5773 * WWW.NORWALKCA.GOV
July 2, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League. of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
The city of Norwalk supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a
resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual
Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to
meet the State's water quality objectives and storm water management plans by
providing direction for the League to educate state leaders and advocate for funding
during discussions on the 2014 Water Bond. The cost of compliance with the new
storm water permit is in the millions of dollars. The Watershed Management Plan alone
will cost close to $1 M. Implementation of projects in the near future based on that
Watershed Management Plan could potentially cost the City of Norwalk $5 -$10 million
annually.
As members of the League our City values the policy development process provided to
the General Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please feel free to
contact Mike Egan, Cit Manag , at (562) 929-5772 if you have any questions.
cc: Ung-Ling Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division c/o
Robb Korinke, Executive Director, Los Angeles County Division, robb@lacities.org
24 2-31
June 27, 2013
Bill Bogaard
President ·
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
CITY OF SIGNAL HILL
2175 Cherry Avenue " Signal HUI, California 90755-3799
RE: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution
President Bogaard:
The city of Signal Hill supports the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a resolution for
consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to meet the State's
water quality objectives and storm water management plans by providing direction for the League to
educate state leaders and advocate for funding during discussions on the 2014 Water Bond. The city of
Signal Hill currently budgets for $755,000 annually for compliance with required stormwater programs,
which represents over 4% of the entire General Fund. Future expenditures are expected to be over $1.S
million annually, as the City will be required to begin construction of costly stormwater capital
improvements.
As members of the League our city values the policy development process provided to the General
Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please feel free to contact l<en Farfsing, City
Manager at (562) 989-7302 or kfarfsing@cityofsignal.org, if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
'7~ cf ~,,_Qf
Michael J. Noll
Mayor
CC: Ling-Ling Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division c/o
Robb l<orinl<e, Executive Director, Los Angeles County Division, robb@lacities.org
25 2-32
C~~ity of :MONIZ(1V~.~
July 2, 2013
Bill Bogaard
President
Office of the Mayor and the City Council
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
SUBJECT: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
As Mayor of the City of Monrovia, I support the Los Angeles County Division's effort to submit a
resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the League's 2013 Annual Conference in
Sacramento.
1887
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to meet the State's
water quality objectives and storm water management plans by providing direction for the League to
educate state leaders and advocate for funding during discussions on the 2014 Water Bond. The City ls
anticipating millions of dollars in stormwater permit compliance costs over the next five years -funds the
City currently does not have available. Funding assistance is vital in order for the City to meet
stormwater permit requirements.
,
As members of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to the General
Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please feel free to contact Heather Maloney, Senior
Management Analyst, at (626) 932-5577 or hmaloney@ci.monrovia.ca.us, if you have any questions.
cc: City Council
Ling-Ling Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division c/o
Robb Korinke, Executive Director, Los Angeles County Division, robb@lacities.org
Laurie K. Lile, City Manager
Ron Bow, Director of Public Works
415 ::)outh Ivy Avenue " Monrovia, California 910"£6-2888 @ (626) 932-5550 e> FAX (626) 932-5520 2-33
EXECUTIVE BOARD
PRtSfDCNT
STEVE TYE
Diamond Bar
VICE PRESIDEl\Jl
VICTOR MANALO
Artesia
SECl~ETARY /THEA SU HER
GUSTAVO CAMCHO
Pko Rivera
PAST PRESIDENT
DIANE J. MARTINEZ
Paramount
DIFU:'CTOI~ AT L/\IKiE
JEFF WOOD
Lakewood
DIHECTOR f'T LAHCiE
SANDRA ARMENT!\
Rosemead
ElUIXiET & AUDIT COMMITTEE
M!CHAE.L DAVITT
La Ca1'iada Flintridge
BYLAWS COMMiTlTE
LOU LAMONTE
Malibu
CITY MGHS/ ADM. COMMITTEE
JIM DESTEFANO
Diamond Bar
LEGAL/CITY-COUNTY
CONrnACT') COMMITTEF
NANCYTRAGARZ I
Wafnut \
LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE .
SAM PEDROZA
Claremont
MEMBtRSl--llP COMMITTEE
ANDREW SAREGA
La Mirada
RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE
BARU SANCHEZ
Cudahy
SELECTIONS COMMITTEE
LIZ REILLY
Duarte
SPE'.CIAL EVFNT':i COMMITTEE
JAMES R. BOZAJ!AN 1·
Calabasas
A' '()C"IA-n "l'M:·<E·'t:i<; C"Of·11·.1,•·1-11.:i.: l
.) ) ... 'L IVFR~Ni<' \;. ZE~U~JY1~-N I
Ro!!i11g Hills Estates
EXECUTIVE DmECTOH ii
SAM OLIV!TO
June 20, 2013
Bill Bogaard
President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Los Angeles County Division Annual Conference Resolution
President Bogaard:
The California Contract Cities Association supports the Los Angeles County Division's
effort to submit a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly at the
League's 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The Division's resolution seeks to address a critical funding need for cities working to
meet the State's water quality objectives and storm water management plans by
providing direction for the League to educate state leaders and advocate for funding
during discussions on the 2014 Water Bond. All of the 58 cities we represent can ill
afford this increasingly expensive ongoing cost.
As members of the League our association values the policy development process
provided to the General Assembly. We appreciate your time on this issue. Please
feel free to contact our office at {562) 622-5533 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Steve Tye
CCCA President
CC: Ling-Ung Chang, President, Los Angeles County Division c/o
Robb Korinke, Executive Director, Los Angeles County Division, robb@lacities.org
·11027 Downey Ave>. Downey, CA 9024l P(562) 622.,5533 F\562) 622-9555 www.contractcities.orq
27 2-34
LETTERS OF CONCURRENCE
Resolution #2
Public Safety Realignment
28 2-35
()FFICE OF TI-fE
MAY(JR
July 17, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Public Safety Realignment Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
300 I~iist Branch Street
A.rroyi) Grande, CA 93420
Ph(mt:: (805) 4-73-5400
FAX: (805) 'l-73-0:186
ggi;itr:@.:¥n:.2YQ~,1:r~ud~.!lrg
~':'!S':.W,_?!E_.r9.)"..\1Ji;t:4nd;;:,.QJ:g
On behalf of the City of Arroyo Grande, I am writing to express support for the League of California Cities'
Public Safety Resolution, which will be submitted for consideration by the League's General Assembly at
the September 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current public safety
realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in response. The resolution
specifically calls out the need for ongoing local law enforcement funding related to realignment, as well as
modification of the criteria for which offenders are eligible for post-release community supervision, i.e. a
non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offender criteria that focuses on total criminal history rather than
merely the last recorded offense.
As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to the General
Assembly. Please contaCt our City Manager, Steve Adams, at (805)473-5404, if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande
29 2-36
.A
,. _____________ , ·-------·--··--·------------------
125 East Col1ege Street • Covina, California 91723-2199
www.covinaca.gov
July 17, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95 814
RE: Public Safoty Realignment Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
On behalf of the City of Covina, I am writing to express support for the League of California
Cities' Public Safety Resolution, which will be submitted for consideration by the League's
General Assembly at the Septem.ber 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current public
safety realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in response. The
resolution specifically calls out the need for ongoing !.ocal law enforcement funding related to
realignment, as well as modification of the criteria for which offenders are eligible for post-
release community supervision, i.e. a non-violent, non-serious, non-sex oftender criteria that
focuses on total criminal history rather than merely the last recorded offense.
As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to the
General Assembly. Please contact Daryl Parrish, City Manager, at (626) 384-5410, if you have
any questions.
Sincerely,
Walter A!Ien Ill
Mayor, City of Covina
······; ..
The City of' Covina provides responsive municipal services and 1nanages
public resources ro enhance rhe quality of li;fe .fi;r our cmmnunity.
30 2-37
Mavor Acg_uanetta Vvarren ---··••-·--··-··•--•----------------~•~~--•••-·---"'"'·""" __ , .. ,. -.--,.~---------------••N"-----··--··---w-~----~-·--•Mm_,,..., ___ ~•·•--•••--··--·-·•-··•·--··•••··•-
July 17, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
RE: Public Safety Realignment Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
On behalf of the City of Fontana, 1 am writing to express support for the League of California Cities'
Public Safety Resolution, which will be submitted for consideration by the League's General
Assembly at the September 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current public safety
realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in response. The resolution
specifically calls out the need for ongoing local law enforcement funding related to realignment, as
well as modification of the criteria for which offenders are eligible for post-release community
supervision, i.e. a non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offender criteria that focuses on total criminal
history rather than merely the last recorded offense.
As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to the General
Assembly. Please contact Ken Hunt City Manager, at (909)350-7654, if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
CSi~~,.~=-~\.3>_.,._,, _____ ···-~ .. ~ y:
Mayor, City of Fontana
AW/ac
8353 StERRA AVENUE, FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 92335 (909) 350-7606 FAX (909) 350-6613 \VWw.fr111tana.org
31 2-38
crrv CJF GLENDORA cnv HALL (626) 914-8201
--·-·M~·---·-· .... __. ....... ,.,,,.,............,. . ..,..,.,..__~-----···~-------·-,,.,._._,_..~MO•MO-·---·--··""'·-•MO .............. -....-_____ ,, ___ ..... ___ ••·---·--...
July 19, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
RE: Public Safety Realignment Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
116 East Foothi1I Blvd., Glendora, California 91741
FAX (626) 914-8221
www.ci.glendora.ca. us
On behalf of the City of Glendora, I am writi'ng to express support for the League of California
Cities' Public Safety Resolution, which will be submitted for consideration by the League's
General Assembly at the September 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current public
safety realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in response. The
resolution specifically calls out the need for ongoing l.ocal law enforcement funding related to
realignment, as well as modification of the criteria for which offenders are eligible for post-
release community supervision, i.e. a non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offender criteria that
focuses on total criminal history rather than merely the last recorded offense.
As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to the
General Assembly. Please contact Chris Jeffers, City Manager, at cjeffers@ci.glendora.ca.us or
(626) 914-8201, if,' you have any questions.
Sincerely,
City of Glendora
Joe Santoro
Mayor
PRU)E O.F THE FOOTHILLS
32 2-39
Oike~ of the \fayor ;rnd rhr' City Council
July 19, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
RE: PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT RESOLUTION
Dear President Bogaard:
As Mayor of the City of Monrovia, I am writing to express support for the League of
California Cities' Public Safety Resolution, which will be submitted for consideration by
the League's General Assembly at the September 2013 Annual Conference in
Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current
public safety realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in
response. The resolution specifically calls out the need for ongoing local law
enforcement funding related to realignment, as well as modification of the criteria for
which offenders are eligible for post-release community supervision, i.e. a non-violent,
non-serious, non-sex offender criteria that focuses on total criminal history rather than
merely the last rE?corded offense.
As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided
to the General Assembly. Please contact Laurie Lile, City Manager, at (626) 932-5501,
if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
172 Mary :t\nn
Mayor
cc: City Council
James Hunt, Police Chief
1887
415 South Ivy Avenue • Monrovia, California 91016-2888 • (626) 932-5550 • FAX (626) 932-5520
33 2-40
PAULS. LEON
MAYOR
JfM W. HOWMAN
MAYOR PRO TEM
ALAN D. WAPt-.lER
DEBRA DORST-PORADA
PAUL VINCENT AVILA
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 9 5 814
RE: Public Safety Realignment Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
July !8,2013
(909) 395-2000
FAX (909) 395-2070
CHRIS HUGHES
C!TY MANAGER
MARY E. WIRTES. MMC
CITY Ct.ERK
JAMES Fl. MJLHlSER
TA"ASURER
On behalf of the City of Ontario, l am writing to express support for che League of California Cities'
Public Safety Resolution. which will be submitted for consideration by the League's General Assembly al
the September 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current public safety
realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in response. The resolution
specifically calls out the need for ongoing local law enforcement funding related to realignment, as well
as modification of the criteria for which offenders arc eligible for post-release community supervision;
i.e., a non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offender criteria that focuses on total criminal history rather than
merely the last recorded offense.
' As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided to the Genem.J
Assembly. Please contact Chris Hughes, City Manager, at (909) 395-20 I 0, if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
/2~ /~~-
PAULS. LEON
Mayor
www.cl.ontario.ca.us
34
@ Printed on recycled paper.
2-41
July 18, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
RE: Public Safety Realignment Resolution
Dear President Bogaard:
From the Office of the Mayor
Shelly Higginbotham
760 Mattie Road
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
(805) 235-6604
shiggin botham(fi)pismo beach. org
On behalf of the City of Pismo Beach, I am writing to express support for the League of
California Cities' Public Safety Resolution, which will be submitted for consideration by
the League's General Assembly at the September 2013 Annual Conference in
Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current
public safety realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in
response. The resolution specifically calls out the need for ongoing local law
enforcement funding related to realignment, as well as modification of the criteria for
which offenders are eligible for post-release community supervision, i.e. a non-violent,
non-serious, non-sex offender criteria that focuses on total criminal history rather than
merely the last recorded offense.
As a member of the League, our City values the policy development process provided
to the General Assembly. Please contact James R. Lewis, City Manager, at (805) 773-
7007, if you have any questions.
Sincerely, /. . , ,. ~~~i~rm~
Mayor
35 2-42
Helene Schneider
Mayor
City of Santa Barbara
Office of Mayor
July 19, 2013
Bill Bogaard, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
HSehn e id er@>Santa Ba 1·b a raCA.go v
www.SantaHarbaruCA.gov
City Hal! RE: Public Safety Realignment Resolution
73-5 Anacapa Street
Santa Barbara, CA
9;3101.1990
l\•la!ling Address:
PO. Box 1990
Santa Barbara, CA
Tel: 805. 564 .532:l
F<r>c 805.564.54 75
Dear President Bogaard:
On. behalf of the City of Santa Barbara, l am writing to express support for the League of
California Cities' Public Safety Resolution, which will be submitted for consideration by the
League's General Assembly at the September 2013 Annual Conference in Sacramento.
The League's Resolution seeks to highlight a number of deficiencies with the current public
safety realignment policy, and what funding and policy changes need to occur in response. The
resolution specifically calls out the need for ongoing local law enforcement funding related to
realignment, as well as modification of the criteria for which offenders are eligible for post-
release community supervision, i.e. a non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offender criteria that
focuses on total criminal history rather than merely the last recorded offense.
It is important to our City, that such state-mandated programs remain fully-funded and that the
regulations do not impede our law enforcement officers' ability to use their professional
discretion in protecting our community.
As a member of the League, our City values the League's leadership and policy direction on
this issue.
Sincerely,'
Helene Schneider,
Mayor
cc: Dave Mullinax, League of California Cities
36 2-43