Cal Cities highlights more than 50 priority bills

Jul 28, 2021

Last Thursday, the League of California Cities briefed city officials on bills of interest currently working their way through the legislative process.

The webinar, Summer Recess Briefing on Priority Bills, provided city officials with a briefing on major bills cities should consider advocating for or against once the Legislature returns from its summer recess on Aug. 16. The webinar is now available online, along with its corresponding slides, which contain a short description of each bill. A brief summary of each policy area’s bills is below.

Community Service 

Five bills related to disaster and community resiliency, homelessness, and youth services were highlighted. Cal Cities supports four of the five. The fifth is AB 1071 (Rodriguez), which Cal Cities supports if amended. The measure would require the Office of Emergency Services, community representatives, and lifeline operators to conduct tabletop exercises of California’s catastrophic response plans on a biennial basis. Cal Cities believes that local participation should be encouraged, not required, due to pandemic-related cuts and costs. Other priority bills include: 

  • SB 344 (Hertzberg) Homeless Shelters Grants. Pets and Veterinary Services — Support
  • AB 536 (Rodriguez) Office of Emergency Services. Mutual Aid Gap Analysis — Support
  • AB 46 (Luz Rivas) California Youth Empowerment Act — Support
  • SB 50 (Limon) Early Learning and Care — Support

Environmental Quality 

Eight Cal Cities-supported environmental quality measures were highlighted. The bills cover a wide range of topics including climate change and resiliency, energy and utilities, sea level rise and coastal rise issues, toxic materials, and solid waste and recycling. Three bills — SB 1 (Atkins), SB 418 (Laird), and SB 619 (Laird) — contain significant funding and resources for environmental issues. Other bills discussed include: 

  • AB 897 (Mullin) Office of Planning and Research. Regional Climate Networks. Climate Adaptation Action Plans — Support
  • AB 585 (Luz Rivas) Climate Change. Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program — Support
  • SB 99 (Dodd) Community Energy Resilience Act of 2021 — Support
  • AB 1311 (Wood) Recycling. Beverage Containers — Support
  • AB 332 (Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials) Hazardous Waste. Treated Wood Waste. Management Standards — Support

Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations

Seven bills, including AB 339 (Lee) were highlighted. This measure would require city councils and boards of supervisors in jurisdictions with over 250,000 residents to provide in-person and a two-way telephonic option or a two-way internet-based service option for the public to attend their meetings. Cal Cities opposes the bill, even though it has been significantly amended.

The Cal Cities Board of Directors took action to oppose AB 237 (Gray). This measure would prohibit public employers from terminating, or threatening to terminate, the health care coverage and related benefits of employees and their families during an authorized strike. If passed, the bill could lead to longer strikes — which are currently infrequent and short — thus disrupting the flow of public services.

Other bills of interest include: 

  • AB 361 (Rivas, Robert) Open Meetings. Local Agencies. Teleconferences — Support
  • AB 654 (Reyes) Public Employment. Unfair Practices. Health Protection — Oppose
  • SB 270 (Durazo) Public Employment. Labor Relations. Employee Information — Oppose
  • SB 284 (Stern) Workers’ Compensation. Firefighters and Peace Officers. Post-traumatic Stress — Oppose
  • SB 278 (Leyva) Public Employees’ Retirement System. Disallowed Compensation. Benefit Adjustments — Oppose

Housing, Community and Economic Development

Dozens of housing, land use, and planning bills have been sidelined or failed to make it out of committee. However, AB 816 (Chiu), SB 15 (Portantino), and SB 6 (Caballero) will probably return in the next legislative cycle. The bills that remain are critically important.

SB 8 (Skinner) would extend the Housing Crisis Act sunset date to 2030. The 2019 Act declared a statewide housing crisis and froze nearly all development-related fees once a developer submits a “preliminary” application, including essential project-specific fees. Cal Cities opposes the measure since there is no evidence it needs to be extended. 

Two bills — AB 500 (Ward), and AB 602 (Grayson) — were recently amended. As such, Cal Cities is reconsidering its position on AB 500, a measure related to coastal development and affordable housing. However, Cal Cities remains opposed to AB 602, which would make significant changes to laws governing local development impact fees and create new state and local costs.

Cal Cities also opposes AB 1401 (Friedman). The bill’s definition of “public transit” would give developers and transit agencies — who are unaccountable to local voters — the power to determine parking requirements. Additionally, the bill could negatively impact the State’s Density Bonus Law by providing developers parking concessions without also requiring them to include affordable housing units in the project.

Other priority bills include: 

  • SB 9 (Atkins) Housing Development Approvals — Oppose
  • AB 215 (Chiu) Housing Element — Oppose
  • AB 989 (Gabriel) Housing Appeals Committee — Oppose

Public Safety

Several amended bills, including AB 89 (Jones-Sawyer) and SB 16 (Skinner) were highlighted. The former would increase a police officer candidate’s age from 18 to 25, unless they have obtained a college degree prior to being hired. SB 16 would expand the categories of records subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (CPRA), impose new requirements for record retention specify a timeline for a law enforcement agency to provide public records to the requester, and would outline restrictions related to attorney-client privilege. Cal Cities is reconsidering its position on both bills

However, Cal Cities remains opposed to SB 2 (Bradford), which would establish new standards and processes for decertifying peace officers, would eliminate the application of certain governmental immunities, and allow wrongful death actions under the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act. The bill undercuts qualified immunity and outlines a largely unworkable peace officer decertification process. Other bills discussed include: 

  • AB 48 (Gonzalez) Law Enforcement: Kinetic Energy Projectiles and Chemical Agents — Oppose
  • AB 603 (McCarty) Law Enforcement Settlements and Judgments. Reporting — Oppose
  • AB 718 (Cunningham) Peace Officers: Investigations of Misconduct — Support
  • SB 314 (Wiener) Alcoholic Beverages — Support if Amended
  • AB 61 (Gabriel) Business Pandemic Relief — Support if Amended
  • SB 389 (Dodd) Alcoholic beverages: retail off-sale license: retail off-sale delivery: retail on-sale license: off-sale privileges — Support if Amended
  • SB 576 (Archuleta) Gambling: Local Moratorium — Oppose
  • SB 277 (Archuleta) Fireworks. Dangerous Fireworks. Seizure. Management — Support if Amended

Revenue and Taxation

This year has been good for cities on the revenue and taxation legislation front. In previous years, bills often created tax credits and exemptions at the expense of cities. This year, those bills were sidelined or stalled, thanks to the advocacy of Cal Cities members. 

Many of the remaining bills focus on short-term rentals and sale taxes. For example, SB 792 (Glazer) aims to better inform the public’s understanding of online transactions and the flow of goods across the state with new, modernized reporting requirements. SB 60 (Glazer) would allow cities and counties to impose larger fines for violations of short-term rental ordinances up to $5,000 for each violation. Cal Cities supports both measures. 

Other bills discussed include:

  • SB 555 (McGuire) State Sponsored Short-Term Rental Tax Collection Program — Oppose Unless Amended
  • SB 780 (Cortese) Public Investment Authorities — Support

Transportation, Communications, and Public Works

Three transportation bills and six communication bills were highlighted. Of particular note is AB 970 (McCarty), which Cal Cities opposes. The bill would create a shorter permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations. For cities with finite resources, focusing on certain permit types with very short turnarounds will result in fewer resources to expedite other types of permits, including those related to affordable housing, health and safety, and other industries. Moreover, the bill does not distinguish between relatively simple permittees, like homeowners, and more complex installations, such as large public charging stations. 

SB 4 (Gonzalez) and AB 14 (Aguiar-Curry) — which Cal Cities supports — complement the recently passed $6 billion broadband package recently signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. Both bills would reform the existing California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) surcharge to help close the digital divide and make it easier for cities to access those funds. Other priority bills include: 

  • AB 43 (Freidman) Speed Limits — Support
  • AB 773 (Nazarian) Street Closures and Designations — Support
  • AB 970 (McCarty) Planning and Zoning. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. Permit Application. Approval — Oppose
  • SB 28 (Caballero) Rural Broadband and Digital Infrastructure Video Competition Reform Act of 2021 — Support
  • SB 556 (Dodd) Street Light Poles, Traffic Signal Poles, Utility Poles, and Support Structures. Attachments — Oppose
  • SB 341 (McGuire) Telecommunications Service. Outages — Support