CC SR 20221018 05 - RPPG_Post-Session Check-in
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 10/18/2022
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to receive and file a status update from the City’s
lobbyist.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Receive and file a report from the City’s lobbyist, Renne Public Policy Group
(RPPG), of its lobbying efforts to date and an update on bills the City has taken a
position on during the 2022 legislative session.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: McKenzie Bright, Administrative Analyst
REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
A. City Council Policy No. 29 (page A-1)
BACKGROUND:
Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 29, the City Council monitors bills under consideration
by the state and will take a position on a bill depending on its potential impact on the City,
Peninsula, or South Bay (see Attachment A).
Over the last several years, the City has taken an increasingly active role in advocating
for City interests at the state level. On August 4, 2020, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2020-46, expressing opposition to proposed planning and zoning
legislation that usurps local control and imposes unfunded mandates and expressing
support for actions to further strengthen local authority and control. On July 6, 2021, the
City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-31, thereby adopting the City’s Housing and
Local Land Use Legislative Platform. On November 2, 2021, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2021-057, thereby adopting the City’s 2022 Legislative Platform.
1
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
After the adoption of the Housing and Local Land Use Legislative Platform, the City
Council directed Staff to explore ways to enhance the City’s legislative voice in
Sacramento. The 2022 Legislative Platform was intended to guide both Staff and a
potential lobbyist with direction on the City’s legislative policy priorities.
In September 2021, a request for proposals was released for state lobbying services, and
on March 1, 2022, the City Council awarded a professional services agreement to Renne
Public Policy Group (RPPG).
At the City Council’s request, this staff report will provide a status report on RPPG’s efforts
since being awarded the professional services agreement and a summary each of the
bills the City Council took a position on during the 2022 session. After the City takes a
position on a bill, RPPG lobbies on behalf of the City’s position in Sacramento.
DISCUSSION:
During the 2021-2022 Legislative Session, the City Council took position s on 40 bills, 19
of which were active during the 2022 session and are discussed in detail later in this
report. Legislative sessions are two, one-year periods that align with the terms of
Assemblymembers, who are elected for two years. Within a calendar year, the Legislature
has specific deadlines to pass bills. The second year of the legislative session can take
up certain business from the first year that failed to pass, but if a bill is not acted on in the
second year, it must be reintroduced in the next two-year legislative session. For
example, AB 916 (restricting public hearings for certain development projects) was
introduced during the 2021 session and passed out of the Assembly but did not have time
to pass out of the Senate – it continued to progress during the 2022 session and was
ultimately signed by Governor Newsom on September 28, 2022. All bills that were not
signed by the end-of-session deadline of September 30, 2022 are considered “dead” and
must be reintroduced in the 2023-2024 Legislative Session if the authors still seek their
passage.
RPPG Status Report
Broadly, RPPG has provided the following major services since March 2022:
• Strategized with Staff in pursuing support for funding for the Portuguese Bend
Landslide Remediation Project, including assisting Staff in preparing requests for
federal Community Project Funding/Congressionally Directed Spending. Senator
Feinstein recommended the project be considered for $2,000,000; this money is
subject to approval through the Congressional budget process. The Department of
Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2023 (S.4678) is currently awaiting
passage of both the Senate and House as of the writing of this report.
• Met three times with the Legislative Subcommittee, consisting of Councilmembers
Alegria and Cruikshank; met twice with Mayor Bradley; and once with Mayor
Bradley and Councilmember Cruikshank; in addition to over 15 meetings with Staff
2
to discuss the City’s position, bills of particular interest, and strategize on
messaging and potential formation of coalitions.
• Monitored nearly 120 Senate and Assembly Committee Hearings and Floor
Sessions.
• Testified on behalf of the City before 18 committees.
• Sent letters on behalf of the City’s positions, including drafting signature and veto
request letters sent to the Governor for bills that made it to his desk.
• Provided summary sheets to Staff, which were forwarded to the City Council and
the public in the City Manager’s Weekly Report, of major actions taken at the state,
such as the Governor’s State of the State Address, a budget summary, and a
summary of actions taken at the end of the Legislative Session, and advised Staff
on bills of interest.
2022 Legislation Update – Summary of Bills
The following section provides a brief summary of the 19 bills on which the Council took
positions in 2022. Complete bill information, including copies of the letters sent by the City
to state representatives, is available at rpvca.gov/LegislationCorner.
The 2022 legislative session ended on August 31, and the Governor had until September
30 to take action on bills sent to his desk. Of the bills the City Council took a position on
this session, 13 passed to the Governor’s desk.
Bills the Governor Signed that the City Council Supported:
• AB 1445 (Chapter 948, Statutes of 2022) requires that councils of governments,
such as the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), consider
evacuation route capacity, wildfire risk, and other impacts caused by climate
change when developing regional housing need allocations (RHNA).
• AB 1740 (Chapter 513, Statutes of 2022) imposes additional requirements on core
recyclers related to the purchase of catalytic converters.
• AB 2432 (Chapter 158, Statutes of 2022) authorizes the South Bay Cities Council
of Governments (SBCCOG) to prepare a neighb orhood electric vehicle
transportation plan. The SBCCOG sponsored this bill.
• AB 2449 (Chapter 285, Statutes of 2022) allows local agencies to use
teleconferencing during public meetings so long as at least a quorum of members
of the legislative body participates in person, among other restrictions, without
requiring that each teleconference location be noticed and accessible. The City
Council supported this bill on April 19, but the City took a neutral position on the
bill after substantive, restrictive amendments were made.
• SB 1079 (Chapter 449, Statutes of 2022) requires California Highway Patrol to
evaluate the efficacy of sound-activated enforcement devices to capture vehicle
noise levels that exceed legal limits.
• SB 1087 (Chapter 514, Statutes of 2022) requires a traceable method of payment
for catalytic converters and prohibits their purchase except from an authorized
retailer or the lawful owner of the catalytic converter.
3
• SB 1338 (Chapter 319, Statutes of 2022) establishes the CARE Court program to
provide a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services for unhoused
individuals with severe behavioral and addiction disorders.
• SB 1444 (Chapter 672, Statutes of 2022) authorizes the establishment of the
South Bay Regional Housing Trust to help fund affordable housing in the South
Bay. The SBCCOG sponsored this bill.
Bills the Governor Signed that the City Council Opposed:
• AB 916 (Chapter 635, Statutes of 2022) prohibits public hearings for projects which
seek to increase the bedroom count within an existing dwelling unit.
• AB 2011 (Chapter 647, Statutes of 2022) requires ministerial, streamlined
approval of affordable and mixed-income housing development in commercial
corridors.
• AB 2097 (Chapter 459, Statutes of 2022) prohibits a local agency from imposing
or enforcing minimum parking requirements on residential, commercial, or other
development within one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-frequency bus
corridor, with exceptions for certain housing developments.
• SB 897 (Chapter 664, Statutes of 2022) increases the maximum height limitation
of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) from 16 feet to 18 feet for detached units in
high-quality transit corridors and 25 feet for attached units.
• SB 932 (Chapter 710, Statutes of 2022) requires cities to include additional plans
related to bicycles, pedestrians, and traffic calming in circulation elements, and to
begin implementing those plans within two years after adoption.
Bills that Failed to Pass the Legislature that the City Council Took Positions on:
• AB 1944 would have allowed local governments to waive the Brown Act
requirement to public private addresses and to make that location available to the
public when utilizing teleconferencing to participate in a meeting – similar to AB
2449, but with fewer restrictions. The City Council supported this bill.
• AB 2407 would have required core recyclers to report additional information
related to catalytic converter purchases. The City Council supported this bill.
• AB 2682 would have required vehicle dealers to etch vehicle identification
numbers (VIN) on catalytic converters. The City Council supported this bill.
• AB 2758 would have required CalEPA to hold public meetings to provide updates
on efforts to study and mitigate DDT off the coast of Los Angeles. The City Council
supported this bill.
• SB 830 would have provided supplemental Local Control Funding Formula funding
to local education agencies based on student enrollment rather than attendance.
The City Council supported this bill.
• SB 986 would have instituted stricter reporting requirements related to catalytic
converts and would have required that vehicle dealers etch all new and used
vehicles’ catalytic converters with the VIN. The City Council supported this bill.
4
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
The City’s 2023 Legislative Platform is tentatively scheduled to come before the City
Council on December 20, 2022, with policy priorities based on the 2022 Platform as well
as policy direction from the Legislative Subcommittee.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends the City Council receive and file this report and the presentation
provided by RPPG during the meeting.
5
CITY COUNCIL POLICY
NUMBER: 29
DATE ADOPTED/AMENDED: 08/01/95 (amended 02/19/02, 03/04/14 and
04/20/21)
SUBJECT: City Council Position on Legislative Items
POLICY:
It shall be the policy of the City that staff shall monitor regional, County, State and
Federal legislative matters and initiatives, and consider the potential impact(s)
such legislative initiatives on the City or the region. Thereafter, staff shall prepare
and present periodic updates on such legislative matters for the City Council to
consider whether to take a position(s) on the same and, if so, what position(s) to
take.
The legislation monitored will include both those issues that the City Council
determines either to support or oppose and those that the City Council may choose
to identify as issues of concern, but not take a position on. The determination of
what position to take on pending legislation shall be solely that of the City Council.
Staff will periodically, at the request of a Council member, place matters of pending
legislation on the City Council agenda for consideration. Staff will provide regular
updates on the status of any legislative action affecting any issues of concern to
the City Council through the Weekly Administrative Report.
If the majority of the Council votes to take a position on a certain legislation, staff
shall prepare the appropriate correspondence , for the Mayor’s signature, to the
relevant Federal, State, County and/or regional legislative representative(s)
expressing the position of the City, and copies provided to the City Council. Such
correspondence shall be posted on the City’s website under the Legislation Corner
homepage.
Individual Council members may wish to support or oppose a specific piece of
legislation irrespective of whether the City Council has or has not taken a position
on such legislation. Any legislative activity by an individual Council member,
including preparing legislative correspondence, may be conducted by a ny Council
member, who shall state that he or she is not acting on behalf of the City and is
representing his or her own personal views. However, staff shall not assist in any
legislative activity of an individual Council member, including the preparation of
legislative correspondence, unless the legislative item has appeared on a Council
agenda and has received a majority vote of the Council.
A-1
The League of California Cities’ “Legislative Bulletin” and any appropriate
publication that summarizes legislation shall be provided as part of the City
Manager’s Weekly Administrative Report to each member of the Council for
review.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council initially adopted a policy for Council involvement in Federal and
State legislative advocacy in 1995. Although the policy seems to have worked
adequately over the first seven years, by 2002 it was thought that it did not allow
the City to respond rapidly to requests to support or oppose legislation that may
be before a committee or on the floor or the Assembly or before Congress and
needs immediate action on the part of supporters or opponents. Therefore, the
policy was amended in 2002 to address these perceived deficiencies. In 2014, the
policy was amended again to revise the procedure for monitoring legislation, and
to explicitly include legislative issues at the County and regional level.
The City Council’s revised legislative policy establishes an internal process for
identifying, tracking and advocating its position on pending legislation
synchronized to the fast-paced “legislation time clock.” Through this proactive
policy, the City Council hopes to have a stronger “voice” in the Peninsula/South
Bay region, Los Angeles County, Sacramento and Washington, DC.
A-2