Agenda packet — Atherton City Council, February 7, 2024

AGENDA PACKET
Town of Atherton
City Council
FEBRUARY 07, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING – STUDY SESSION
4:00 PM
Council Chambers
80 Fair Oaks Lane
Atherton, CA 94027
Join Zoom Meeting:

One tap mobile: 16699006833,,97102770195#
US (San Jose)
Dial by your location: 1 669 900 6833 US (San
Jose)
Meeting ID: 971 0277 0195
Weblink: https://ciathertonca.zoom.us/j/97102770195
Remote Public Comments:

Meeting participants are encouraged to submit
public comments in writing in advance of the
meeting. The following email will be monitored
during the meeting and documented for the record.

Email: [email protected]
This Agenda may not reflect the actual order of items. The order of items is subject to change based on Council action.

SPECIAL MEETING STUDY SESSION
ROLL CALL – DeGolia, Holland, Widmer, Vice Mayor Lewis , Mayor HawkinsManuelian PUBLIC COMMENT – Public Comments can be emailed directly to [email protected]
As a Special Meeting, Public Comment is limited to items that are on the Agenda. Speakers’ time is limited to three minutes. Speakers may also speak when the item comes up on the Agenda during the meeting.

ACTION ITEMS
STUDY SESSION

1. LEGISLATIVE LOBBYIST REPORT: JOE A. GONSALVES & SON
Report: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
Recommendation: Welcome and Introduction of Legislative Lobbyist Team, review Legislative Lobbyist Report, and provide general feedback and input into the Town’s Legislative Platform.

Description: This item will be a review of the legislative lobbyist report from Gonsalves and Son. This will be an opportunity for the Council to understand the State Legislature process and to review and provide feedback on Town issues.

2. FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION ON A COMMUNITY SURVEY
Report: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
Recommendation: Review and consider a new Community Survey or Customer Satisfaction Survey.

Meeting Agenda Packet – February 07, 2024

Page 1 of 96 ends

Report: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
Recommendation: Welcome and Introduction of Legislative Lobbyist Team, review Legislative Lobbyist Report, and provide general feedback and input into the Town’s Legislative Platform.

2. FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION ON A COMMUNITY SURVEY
Report: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
Recommendation: Review and consider a new Community Survey or Customer Satisfaction Survey.

Description: This item will be an opportunity for Council to review survey results from 2013 and a chance to seek Council input on a new community needs or satisfaction survey.

3. Enter Subject Here
Report: ANTHONY SUBER, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/ CITY CLERK
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council
Description: This is a receive and file item to review the midyear budget report for fiscal year 20232024
COUNCIL REPORTS/COMMENTS

ADJOURN
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:

If you challenge a Town zoning, planning, or any other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judicial review of any Town administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period.

Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection by 5:00 p.m. the Friday before each regularly scheduled City Council meeting.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 7520500. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. (29 CRF

35.104 ADA Title II)
Public Comments:

The Town of Atherton Council and Committee or Commission meetings are a limited public forum, and all public comment must relate to something that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council or Committees. If comments do not relate to the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council or Committee, we will stop the comment and a warning may be provided. If the comment continues to be outside of the subject matter jurisdiction the speaker will be stopped, and we will move on to the next speaker. Speakers found in violation of this rule Meeting Agenda Packet – February 07, 2024

Page 2 of 96 ends

35.104 ADA Title II)
Public Comments:

Meeting Agenda Packet – February 07, 2024

Page 3 of 96 ends

Item No. 1
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – STUDY SESSION
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
DATE: FEBRUARY 7, 2024
SUBJECT: LEGISLATIVE LOBBYIST REPORT: JOE A. GONSALVES & SON

RECOMMENDATION
Welcome and Introduction of Legislative Lobbyist Team, review Legislative Lobbyist Report, and provide general feedback and input into the Town’s Legislative Platform.

BACKGROUND
In late 2023, the Town engaged Joe A. Gonsalves & Son as the Town’s Legislative Lobbyist to assist the Town in a wide range of issues involving State legislation and legislative advocacy. The Gonsalves Team met with key staff to identify various issues of importance to the Town. These included broad based areas of legislative advocacy including public safety, housing, local control and fiscal sustainability.

The Gonsalves Team are present (via Zoom) to provide the Council with an introduction to the Joe A. Gonsalves firm, an overview of the state of the State Legislature, key issues on the legislative calendar, and provide insights into the 2024 Legislative Session.

Attached to this Staff Report are the following:
 2023 Legislative Summary
 November 2023 Legislative Update Report
 2024 Legislative Calendar
 January 2024 Legislative Update
As the Council is aware, the Town is a member of the League of California Cities (Cal Cities). Cal Cities, just by virtue of its expanded membership of California cities, provides advocacy on behalf nearly all jurisdictions in the State of California at the State and Federal level. Their advocacy mission is to expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the qualify of life for all Californians. Cal Cities has 476 member cities of varying size and demographic and of varying resource. While valuable, representation by Cal Cities is designed to address concerns at a broad level in ways that assist a majority of its member cities.

Page 4 of 96 ends

Legislative Lobbyist Report
FEBRUARY 7, 2024

Page 2 of 3 ends

The Town engaged the Gonsalves Team to specifically address Atherton’s needs; and while some of the legislative output from Cal Cities may overlap the Gonsalves Team, where there is a specific need the Town has a resource that can be brought to bear on its issues.

This Study Session is an opportunity for the Council to meet the Gonsalves Team, ask questions about the state of the State Legislature, explore how the process works, and review and provide feedback on important Town issues that might benefit from legislative solutions. It is important to recognize that not all issues can be solved via legislation at the State level, not all legislators support issues of local concern, and legislation is often designed to address a broad base of constituency.

Issues of Local Concern
 Retaining Local Control (Land Use)
 Housing and Land Use (new housing laws)
 Retention of Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) Excess Revenue ($2.3m)  Retention of Streets & Highways Funding (Gas Tax/SB1) ($350k)  Retention of Property Tax In Lieu/VLF Property Tax Swap/SB89 VLF Shift ($1.6m)  Retention of Prop 172 Sales Tax ($112k)
 Protections Under Proposition 1A and Proposition 22
 State Incursions into Local Law Enforcement
 Unfunded State Mandates
Revenue Brief
The Town’s Revenue budget is approximately $23.7m (inclusive of ERAF). The Expenditure budget is approximately $19.3m in operations, $862k in debt service, and an allocation of $3.5- $5.0m to Capital Projects (depending on available reserves). Identifiable revenue at risk totals $4.4m.

State legislation that imposes unfunded mandates, new regulatory requirements that come with additional local cost, or legislation that reduces existing local revenue upon which the Town is dependent (ERAF, VLF, SB1, Sales Tax, etc.) can put the Town’s budget into an imbalance by increasing costs and/or reducing revenues. While this may not immediately jeopardize basic operations given the Town’s strong property tax history and projections; it could negatively affect the Town’s ability to plan for and conduct necessary capital infrastructure improvements.

FISCAL IMPACT
None

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:

Page 5 of 96 ends

Legislative Lobbyist Report
FEBRUARY 7, 2024

Page 3 of 3 ends

• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,200 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2023 Legislative Summary

2. November 2023 Legislative Update Report

3. 2024 Legislative Calendar

4. January 2024 Legislative Update

Page 6 of 96 ends

Town of Atherton
2023 Legislative Summary
AB 28 (Gabriel D) Firearms and ammunition: excise tax.

Current Text: Chaptered: 9/26/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 9/26/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 231, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 9/26/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Existing law establishes the California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) Grant Program, administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections, to award competitive grants for the purpose of violence intervention and prevention. This bill, the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Act, would, commencing July 1, 2024, impose an excise tax in the amount of 11% of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of a firearm, firearm precursor part, and ammunition, as specified. The tax would be collected by the state pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law. The bill would require that the revenues collected be deposited in the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Fund, which the bill would establish in the State Treasury. The bill would require the moneys received in the fund to be used to fund various gun violence prevention, education, research, response, and investigation programs, as specified. The bill would require the Director of Finance to transfer, as a loan, $2,400,000 from the General Fund to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to implement these provisions, as specified. The bill would require each licensed firearms dealer, firearms manufacturer, and ammunition vendor to register with the department for a certificate, as specified. The bill would also provide procedures for the issuance, revocation, and reinstatement of a permit.

Organization Position
Fairfield Support

Page 7 of 96 ends

AB 33 (Bains D) Fentanyl Misuse and Overdose Prevention Task Force.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/13/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 887, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/13/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would, subject to an appropriation, establish the Fentanyl Misuse and Overdose Prevention Task Force to undertake various duties relating to fentanyl misuse, including, among others, collecting and organizing data on the nature and extent of fentanyl misuse in California and evaluating approaches to increase public awareness of fentanyl misuse. The bill would require the task force to be cochaired by the Attorney General and the State Public Health Officer, or their designees, and would specify the membership of the task force.

Organization Position
Simi Valley Support
Thousand Oaks Support
LEAGUE Support
Norwalk Support
Milpitas SUPP - NL
Palmdale Support
AB 37 (Bonta D) Political Reform Act of 1974: campaign funds: security expenses.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 8/31/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: The Political Reform Act of 1974 regulates the use of campaign funds held by candidates for elective office, elected officers, and campaign committees. The act authorizes a candidate or elected officer to use campaign funds to pay or reimburse the state for the costs of installing and monitoring a home or office electronic security system if specified conditions are met. These conditions include that the candidate or elected officer has received threats to physical safety that have been verified by law enforcement and that no more than $5,000 in campaign funds be used for this purpose. This bill would eliminate those conditions. The bill would instead authorize a candidate or elected officer to use campaign funds to pay or reimburse the state for the reasonable costs of installing and monitoring a home or office electronic security system, and for the reasonable costs of providing personal security to a candidate, elected officer, or the immediate family or staff of a candidate or elected officer, provided that the threat or potential threat to safety arises from the candidate's or elected officer's activities, duties, or status as a candidate or elected officer. The bill would require the return of the security system to the committee that paid for the security system or reimbursement by the candidate, elected officer, immediate family, or staff, to the campaign fund account of the committee that paid for the security system and reporting of the reimbursement to the Fair Political Practices Commission, as specified. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support

Page 8 of 96 ends

AB 42 (Ramos D) Tiny homes: temporary sleeping cabins: fire sprinkler requirements.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 8/21/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 725, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The Planning and Zoning Law, among other things, provides for the creation of accessory dwelling units by local ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, in accordance with specified standards and conditions. Existing law prohibits a local agency from requiring an accessory dwelling unit to provide fire sprinklers, if they are not required for the primary residence. This bill, until January 1, 2027, would prohibit a local agency from imposing or enforcing any requirement to provide fire sprinklers for a temporary sleeping cabin that is on a site with 50 or fewer temporary sleeping cabins. The bill would define "temporary sleeping cabin" to mean a nonpermanent structure that is intended to provide temporary housing to people experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness, has a total floor area of less than 250 feet, and does not include plumbing. The bill would require a temporary sleeping cabin that does not include fire sprinklers to comply with alternative fire life and safety standards that include providing, among other things, a smoke alarm and carbon monoxide alarm in the unit, a fire extinguisher in the unit, and ingress and egress that facilitates rapid exit of the temporary sleeping cabin.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Oppose
AB 50 (Wood D) Public utilities: timely service: customer energization.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 317, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/7/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Existing law authorizes the Public Utilities Commission to fix the rates and charges for every public utility, and requires that those rates and charges be just and reasonable. Existing law requires the commission to enforce rules governing the extension of service by electrical corporations. This bill would require the commission to determine the criteria for timely service for electric customers to be energized, including, among other things, categories of timely electric service through energization, as specified. The bill would require each electrical corporation that energized less than 35% of customers with completed applications exceeding 12 months in duration by January 31, 2023, to submit a report to the commission, as specified, on or before December 1, 2024, demonstrating that the electrical corporation has energized 80% of customers with applications deemed complete as of January 31, 2023, as specified. To improve the accuracy of projected demand and facilitate achievement of the goal of timely electric service through energization, the bill would require each electrical corporation to evaluate and update, as necessary, its existing distribution planning processes. In order to inform the commission's determination of criteria for timely service, the bill would require the commission to annually collect certain information from each electrical corporation until new reporting requirements are established. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position
Norwalk OUA
AB 84 (Ward D) Property tax: welfare exemption: affordable housing.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/16/2022
Last Amend: 7/13/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 734, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: (1) Existing property tax law, in accordance with the California Constitution, provides for a "welfare exemption" for property used exclusively for religious, hospital, scientific, or charitable purposes and that is owned or operated by certain types of nonprofit entities, if certain qualifying criteria are met. Existing law defines "property used exclusively for religious, hospital, or charitable purposes" to include facilities in the course of construction on or after the first Monday of March 1954, as specified. This bill would expand this partial exemption to property acquired, rehabilitated, developed, or operated, or any combination of these factors, with financing from qualified 501(c)(3) bonds, as defined.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Oppose
Milpitas OPP - NL

Page 9 of 96 ends

AB 233 (Wilson D) Local government: public or private property: disposal of animal excrement.

Current Text: Amended: 6/22/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/12/2023
Last Amend: 6/22/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/7/2023)(May be acted upon Jan 2024)
Location: 9/14/2023-S. 2 YEAR

Summary: Would authorize a local agency to adopt an ordinance requiring the owner of, or person otherwise responsible for, an animal to collect and dispose of any animal excrement deposited by that animal on public or private property. The bill would declare that these provisions are declaratory of existing law.

Organization Position
Norco Oppose
AB 246 (Papan D) Product safety: menstrual products: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Current law prohibits, beginning January 1, 2025, a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, delivering, holding, or offering for sale in commerce any cosmetic product that contains intentionally added perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as defined. Current law similarly prohibits, beginning January 1, 2025, any person from manufacturing, distributing, selling, or offering for sale in the state any new, not previously owned, textile articles that contain regulated PFAS, except as specified, and requires a manufacturer to use the least toxic alternative when removing regulated PFAS in textile articles to comply with these provisions. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2025, similarly prohibit any person from manufacturing, distributing, selling, or offering for sale in the state any menstrual products that contain regulated PFAS, and requires a manufacturer to use the least toxic alternative when removing regulated PFAS in menstrual products to comply with these provisions. The bill would require a manufacturer of a menstrual product to provide persons that offer the product for sale or distribution in the state with a certificate of compliance stating that the menstrual product is in compliance with these provisions and does not contain any regulated PFAS.

Organization Position

OCWD SUPP - NL
AB 249 (Holden D) Water: schoolsites: lead testing.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/18/2023
Last Amend: 9/6/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, requires the State Water Resources Control Board to administer provisions relating to the regulation of drinking water to protect public health. The act requires the state board to establish a grant program, in consultation with the State Department of Education, to award grants to local educational agencies for the purposes of improving access to, and the quality of, drinking water in public schools serving kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, and preschools and child daycare facilities located on public school property. This bill would require a community water system that serves a schoolsite, as defined, to test for lead in the potable water system outlets of the schoolsite before January 1, 2027, except as provided. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position

WATER OUA

Page 10 of 96 ends

AB 250 (Rodriguez D) State highways: State Route 83: reduction.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/18/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 516, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law authorizes the California Transportation Commission to relinquish to local agencies state highway segments that have been deleted from the state highway system by legislative enactment or have been superseded by relocation, and in certain other cases. Current law designates State Route 83 from Route 71 to Route 10 near the City of Upland. Current law authorizes the commission to relinquish to the City of Ontario all or a portion of State Route 83 within the city’s jurisdiction and prescribes conditions that apply upon relinquishment. This bill would authorize the commission to additionally relinquish to the City of Chino all or a portion of State Route 83 within the city’s jurisdiction and prescribe conditions that apply upon relinquishment.

Organization Position
Chino Support
GONSALVES Support
OUR BILLS Support
AB 309 (Lee D) The Social Housing Act.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/26/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/7/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Would enact the Social Housing Act and would create, in the Department of General Services, the Social Housing Program, the mission of which would be to ensure that qualified social housing developments are produced on leased state property to help address the housing crisis, as specified. The bill would authorize the program to identify and develop up to 3 qualified social housing projects, as specified, with the intent to use the results to inform public policy related to developing an independent public entity to develop statewide qualified social housing. The bill would require the program to solicit bids to develop qualified social housing units, and prioritize bids that demonstrate long-term revenue neutrality or a cost rent model, as those terms are defined. The bill would require the program to employ 2 different leasing models, the rental model and the ownership model, as specified, in creating social housing. The bill would prohibit a city or county from denying a social housing development authorized under the program. The bill would authorize a city or county to propose objective design review standards, as specified, and authorize a city or county to propose modifications to mitigate any specific, adverse impacts on public health or safety, as specified.

Organization Position

LEAGUE OUA
Norwalk Oppose
Folsom OUA
Cerritos Oppose
Thousand Oaks Oppose

Page 11 of 96 ends

AB 334 (Rubio, Blanca D) Public contracts: conflicts of interest.

Current Text: Chaptered: 9/30/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/30/2023
Last Amend: 6/7/2023
Status: 9/30/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 263, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 9/30/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law prohibits members of the Legislature and state, county, district, judicial district, and city officers or employees from being financially interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they are members. Current law authorizes the Fair Political Practices Commission to commence an administrative or civil action against persons who violate this prohibition, as prescribed, and includes provisions for the collection of penalties after the time for judicial review of a commission order or decision has lapsed, or if all means of judicial review of the order or decision have been exhausted. Current law identifies certain remote interests in contracts that are not subject to this prohibition and other situations in which an official is not deemed to be financially interested in a contract. Current law makes a willful violation of this prohibition a crime. This bill would establish that an independent contractor, who meets specified requirements, is not an officer for purposes of being subject to the prohibition on being financially interested in a contract. The bill would authorize a public agency to enter into a contract with an independent contractor who is an officer for a later phase of the same project if the independent contractor did not engage in or advise on, as specified, the making of the subsequent contract. This bill would establish that a person who acts in good faith reliance on these provisions is not in violation of the above-described conflict-of-interest prohibitions and would prohibit them from being subject to criminal, civil, or administrative enforcement under those prohibitions if the initial contract includes specified language and the independent contractor is not in breach of those terms.

Organization Position
LEAGUE Support
Thousand Oaks Support
Norwalk Support
AB 350 (Aguiar-Curry D) Regional transportation plans: Sacramento Area Council of Governments.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/31/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 648, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law requires each transportation planning agency to adopt and submit to the California Transportation Commission and the Department of Transportation an updated regional transportation plan every 4 or 5 years, as specified. This bill would require the updated regional transportation plan, sustainable communities strategy, and environmental impact report adopted by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) on November 18, 2019, to remain in effect for all purposes until the SACOG adopts its next update to its regional transportation plan, which the bill would require it to adopt and submit on or before December 31, 2025, as specified. The bill would require the SACOG, on or before July 1, 2026, and biennially thereafter, to report on the regional implementation of its most recently adopted sustainable communities strategy in a publicly available format on its internet website, as provided, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program.

Organization Position
Roseville Support
Elk Grove Support

Page 12 of 96 ends

AB 413 (Lee D) Vehicles: stopping, standing, and parking.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/2/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 652, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would prohibit the stopping, standing, or parking of a vehicle within 20 feet of the vehicle approach side of any unmarked or marked crosswalk or 15 feet of any crosswalk where a curb extension is present, as specified. The bill would, prior to January 1, 2025, authorize jurisdictions to only issue a warning for a violation, and would prohibit them from issuing a citation for a violation, unless the violation occurs in an area marked using paint or a sign.

Organization Position
Norwalk Oppose
AB 474 (Rodriguez D) State Threat Assessment Center: transnational criminal organizations.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/7/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, creates, within the office of the Governor, the Office of Emergency Services, which is responsible for addressing natural, technological, or human-caused disasters and emergencies, including responsibility for activities necessary to prevent, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of emergencies and disasters to people and property. This bill would find and declare that the State Threat Assessment Center (STAC) serves as California's information-sharing clearinghouse of strategic threat analysis and situational awareness reporting for statewide leadership and the public safety community, as specified, and that the STAC is California's state primary fusion center, as designated by the Governor, and is operated by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, the Office of Emergency Services, and the Department of Justice. The bill would make other findings and declarations related to drug trafficking and transnational criminal organizations. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position
Simi Valley Support
Thousand Oaks Support
LEAGUE Support
Milpitas SUPP - NL
Norwalk Support
Santa Clarita Support

Page 13 of 96 ends

AB 480 (Ting D) Surplus land.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/7/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 788, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law prescribes requirements for the disposal of surplus land by a local agency, as defined, and requires, except as provided, a local agency disposing of surplus land to comply with certain notice requirements before disposing of the land or participating in negotiations to dispose of the land with a prospective transferee, particularly that the local agency send a notice of availability to specified entities that have notified the Department of Housing and Community Development of their interest in surplus land, as specified. Under current law, if the local agency receives a notice of interest, the local agency is required to engage in good faith negotiations with the entity desiring to purchase or lease the surplus land. This bill would define the term “dispose” to mean the sale of the surplus property or a lease of any surplus property entered into on or after January 1, 2024, for a term longer than 15 years, including renewal options, as specified. The bill would provide that “dispose” does not include entering a lease for surplus land on which no development or demolition will occur, regardless of the term of the lease.

Organization Position
Indian Wells Oppose
Rancho Cordova Oppose
Kerman Oppose
Elk Grove Oppose
Bellflower OPP - NL
Palmdale OPP - NL
Chino Oppose
Norwalk Support
Thousand Oaks Oppose
AB 504 (Reyes D) State and local public employees: labor relations: strikes.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/8/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/7/2023
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act and the Ralph C. Dills Act regulate the labor relations of employees and employers of local public agencies and the state, respectively. Those acts grant specified employees, including, among others, certain employees of fire departments, of local public agencies and the state the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their choosing and require public agency employers, among other things, to meet and confer with representatives of recognized employee organizations and exclusive representatives on terms and conditions of employment. The acts grant the Public Employment Relations Board the power to hear specified disputes in relation to these provisions and to make determinations regarding them. This bill would provide, except as specified, that it is not unlawful or a cause for discipline or other adverse action against a public employee for that public employee to refuse to enter property that is the site of a primary strike, perform work for a public employer involved in a primary strike, or go through or work behind a primary strike line. The bill would prohibit a public employer from directing a public employee to take those actions. The bill would authorize a recognized employee organization to inform employees of these rights and encourage them to exercise those rights.

Organization Position
Kerman Oppose
Whittier Oppose
Thousand Oaks Oppose Page 14 of 96
Roseville Oppose
Fairfield Oppose
AB 519 (Schiavo D) Affordable Housing Finance Workgroup: affordable housing: consolidated application and coordinated review process.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/7/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 742, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and sets forth its powers and duties, including promoting the development of affordable housing in the state. Current law creates the California Housing Finance Agency within the department and authorizes the agency to make loans to finance affordable housing.

Current law establishes the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee to allocate specified federal low-income housing tax credits. Current law also establishes the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee for the purpose of implementing the volume limit for the state on private activity bonds established pursuant to federal law. Under existing law, the committee’s duties include annually determining a state ceiling on the aggregate amount of private activity bonds that may be issued, and allocating that amount among state and local agencies. This bill would require specified reviewing entities, as defined as the above-described entities, to jointly convene an Affordable Housing Finance Workgroup to develop recommendations for state-administered programs to utilize a consolidated application for multifamily affordable rental housing developers to use to obtain grants, soft loans, low-income housing tax credits, tax exempt bonds, federal funds, as applicable, and other types of subsidies for building affordable housing, and develop a coordinated review process for the application, as described. The bill would require the workgroup to include representatives of the reviewing entities, nonprofit and for-profit affordable housing developers, and local and tribal governments. The bill would require the workgroup to identify specified information, including any state-administered program that may utilize the consolidated application and coordinated review process, and a timeline for developing a single consolidated application and coordinated review process.

Organization Position
LEAGUE Support
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 531 (Irwin D) The Behavioral Health Infrastructure Bond Act of 2023.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/12/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/8/2023
Last Amend: 9/11/2023
Status: 10/12/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 789, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/12/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would provide that projects funded by the Behavioral Health Infrastructure Bond Act of 2024 that provide housing for individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness and who are inherently impacted by or at increased risk for medical diseases or conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic or other communicable diseases and are disbursed in accordance with the Multifamily Housing Program, or projects that are disbursed in accordance with the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program, are a use by right and subject to the streamlined, ministerial review process. The bill would define use by right for these purposes to mean that the local government’s review of the project does not require a conditional use permit, planned unit development permit, or other discretionary local government review or approval that would constitute a project subject to the approval process in CEQA.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 557 (Hart D) Open meetings: local agencies: teleconferences.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/8/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 534, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The Ralph M. Brown Act allows for meetings to occur via teleconferencing subject to certain requirements, particularly that the legislative body notice each teleconference location of each member that will be participating in the public meeting, that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, that members of the public be allowed to Page 15 of 96 address the legislative body at each teleconference location, that the legislative body post an agenda at each teleconference location, and that at least a quorum of the legislative body participate from locations within the boundaries of the local agency’s jurisdiction. The act provides an exemption to the jurisdictional requirement for health authorities, as defined. Current law, until January 1, 2024, authorizes the legislative body of a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with those specified teleconferencing requirements in specified circumstances when a declared state of emergency is in effect. Those circumstances are that (1) state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, (2) the legislative body is meeting for the purpose of determining whether, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, or (3) the legislative body has previously made that determination. If there is a continuing state of emergency, or if state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, existing law requires a legislative body to make specified findings not later than 30 days after the first teleconferenced meeting, and to make those findings every 30 days thereafter, in order to continue to meet under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures. This bill would revise the authority of a legislative body to hold a teleconference meeting under those abbreviated teleconferencing procedures when a declared state of emergency is in effect.

Organization Position
OCWD Support
Thousand Oaks Support
Norwalk Support
AB 610 (Holden D) Youth Transit Pass Pilot Program: free youth transit passes.

Current Text: Amended: 8/14/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/9/2023
Last Amend: 8/14/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/11/2023)(May be acted upon Jan 2024)
Location: 9/14/2023-S. 2 YEAR

Summary: Current law declares that the fostering, continuance, and development of public transportation systems are a matter of state concern. Current law authorizes the Department of Transportation to administer various programs and allocates moneys for various public transportation purposes. Upon the appropriation of moneys by the Legislature, this bill would create the Youth Transit Pass Pilot Program, administered by the department, for purposes of awarding grants to transit agencies for the costs of creating, designing, developing, advertising, distributing, and implementing free youth transit passes to persons attending certain educational institutions, providing free transit service to holders of those passes, and administering and participating in the program, as specified. The bill would authorize a transit agency to submit a grant application in partnership with one or more educational institutions and would also authorize grant funds to be used to maintain, subsidize, or expand an existing fare-free program, as provided. The bill would authorize a transit agency with an existing fare-free program that enables a person 18 years of age or younger to use a transit agency’s bus and rail services without paying any additional fare or charge to submit an application without an educational institution partner, as provided.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 701 (Villapudua D) Controlled substances: fentanyl.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 540, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law classifies controlled substances into 5 schedules and places the greatest restrictions and penalties on the use of those substances placed in Schedule I. Current law classifies the drug fentanyl in Schedule II. Existing law prohibits a person from possessing for sale or purchasing for purposes of sale specified controlled substances, including fentanyl, and provides for imprisonment in a county jail for 2, 3, or 4 years for a violation of this provision. Current law also imposes an additional term, and authorizes a trial court to impose a specified fine, upon a person who is convicted of a violation of, or of a conspiracy to violate, specified provisions of law with respect to a substance containing heroin, cocaine base, and cocaine, if the substance exceeds a specified weight. This bill would add fentanyl to the substances for which additional terms or fines can be imposed and would require a defendant who violates those laws with respect to a substance containing heroin, fentanyl, or cocaine, as specified, to know of the substance’s nature or character as a controlled substance to be subjected to an additional term and authorized fine.

Organization Position
Norwalk Support

Page 16 of 96 ends

Palmdale Support
Santa Clarita Support
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 719 (Boerner D) Medi-Cal: nonmedical and nonemergency medical transportation.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 7/10/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/7/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Would require the State Department of Health Care Services to require Medi-Cal managed care plans that are contracted to provide nonmedical transportation or nonemergency medical transportation to contract with public paratransit service operators who are enrolled Medi-Cal providers for the purpose of establishing reimbursement rates for nonmedical and nonemergency medical transportation trips provided by a public paratransit service operator. The bill would require the rates reimbursed by the managed care plan to the public paratransit service operator to be based on the department’s fee-for-service rates for nonmedical and nonemergency medical transportation service, as specified. The bill would condition implementation of these provisions on receipt of any necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation.

Organization Position
ACCESS Support
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 727 (Weber D) Product safety: cleaning products and floor sealers or floor finishes: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Would, beginning January 1, 2026, prohibit a person from manufacturing, selling, delivering, distributing, holding, or offering for sale in the state a cleaning product that contains regulated perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as specified. The bill, beginning January 1, 2028, would prohibit a person from manufacturing, selling, delivering, distributing, holding, or offering for sale in the state a floor sealer or floor finish that contains regulated PFAS, as specified. The bill would make a violation of these provisions punishable by a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 per day for each violation, upon an action brought by the Attorney General, a city or county attorney, a county counsel, city prosecutor, or a district attorney. The bill would exempt treatments containing PFAS for use on converted textiles or leathers, as specified, from these provisions.

Organization Position

OCWD SUPP - NL
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 744 (Carrillo, Juan D) California Transportation Commission: data, modeling, and analytic software tools procurement.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 541, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would require the California Transportation Commission to convene relevant state agencies to assess the procurement and implementation of data, modeling, and analytic software tools to support the state’s sustainable transportation, congestion management, affordable housing, efficient land use, air quality, economic, and climate change strategies and goals, as provided. On or before July 1, 2025, the bill would require the commission to develop a proposal to procure data, modeling, and analytic software tools and a process to grant access to the data it procures directly, or provide a process for direct allocation of funding to agencies for data procurement, or both of those, as provided.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support

Page 17 of 96 ends

AB 761 (Friedman D) Local finance: enhanced infrastructure financing districts.

Current Text: Amended: 9/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/13/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Withdrawn from committee. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

Location: 9/14/2023-S. RLS.

Summary: Current law authorizes the legislative body of a city or a county to designate a proposed enhanced infrastructure financing district by adopting a resolution of intention to establish the proposed district which, among other things, is required to state that an enhanced infrastructure financing district is proposed and describe the boundaries of the proposed district. Current law requires the public financing authority to direct the preparation of and adopt an infrastructure financing plan consistent with the general plan and any relevant specific plan, and consisting of, among other things, a financing section. Current law requires that the financing section include a plan for financing the public facilities, a limit on the total number of dollars of taxes that may be allocated to the district pursuant to the plan, and a date, either not more than 45 years from the date on which the issuance of the bonds is approved for the plan on which the district will cease to exist, by which time all tax allocation to the district will end, or, where the district is divided into project areas, a date on which the infrastructure financing plan will cease to be in effect and all tax allocations to the district will end and a date on which the district’s authority to repay indebtedness with incremental tax revenues will end, as specified. This bill, for plans proposed on or after January 1, 2024, would specify that for the purpose of development and construction of passenger rail projects in the County of Los Angeles where at least 75% of the revenue from the district is used for debt service on a federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loan, the date on which the district will cease to exist shall not be more than 75 years from the date of the issuance of bonds or approval of a loan, as specified. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for specified districts enacted primarily for the purpose of development and construction of zero-emission mass transit projects.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 764 (Bryan D) Local redistricting.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 343, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/7/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Existing law requires counties, general law and charter cities, and special districts that elect their governing boards using district-based elections to adopt, in a prescribed manner, new district boundaries following each federal decennial census. Existing law also requires county boards of education, and the governing boards of school districts and community college districts in which trustee areas have been established, to adopt new boundaries for their trustee areas following each federal decennial census. This bill would revise and recast these provisions. The bill would require counties, county boards of education, cities, school districts, community college districts, and special districts, if the governing body of these local jurisdictions is elected by districts, to comply with uniform requirements related to redistricting. The bill would require local jurisdictions to adopt district boundaries, using specified criteria, following the decision to establish district-based elections and following each federal decennial census. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Oppose

Page 18 of 96 ends

AB 799 (Rivas, Luz D) Homelessness: financing plan.

Current Text: Amended: 9/1/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/12/2023)(May be acted upon Jan 2024)
Location: 9/14/2023-S. 2 YEAR

Summary: Would require the California Interagency Council on Homelessness, in collaboration with continuums of care, counties, and big cities, as defined, and other stakeholders, to establish and regularly update a financing plan to solve homelessness by the year 2035. The bill would require the council to establish and update statewide performance metrics to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in homelessness and to increase successful exits from homelessness to permanent housing by updating the Statewide Action Plan for Preventing and Ending Homelessness in California, no later than January 1, 2025, and would require the council to publish these goals on its internet website, as specified.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 821 (Grayson D) Planning and zoning: general plan: zoning ordinance: conflicts.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 6/22/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 748, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and of certain land outside its boundaries. Current law requires that county or city zoning ordinances be consistent with the general plan of the county or city by January 1, 1974.

Current law authorizes any resident or property owner to bring an action or proceeding in the superior court to enforce compliance with these provisions within 90 days of the enactment of any new zoning ordinance or the amendment of any existing zoning ordinance. Current law requires a zoning ordinance to be amended within a reasonable time so that it is consistent with the general plan in the event that the ordinance becomes inconsistent with the plan by reason of amendment to the plan. This bill would additionally authorize any resident or property owner to bring an action or proceeding in the superior court to enforce compliance with these provisions within 90 days of the failure of a local agency to amend a zoning ordinance within a reasonable time of the zoning ordinance becoming inconsistent with the general plan due to amendment to the plan or to any element of the plan.

Organization Position
LEAGUE Oppose
AB 918 (Garcia D) Health care district: County of Imperial.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/14/2023
Last Amend: 9/11/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 549, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would form a local health care district in the County of Imperial, designated as the Imperial Valley Healthcare District, that includes all of the County of Imperial. The bill would require the initial board of directors of the Imperial Valley Healthcare District to be appointed from and by specified bodies, including among others, the Imperial County Board of Supervisors, the Pioneers Memorial Healthcare District Board of Directors, and the Heffernan Memorial Healthcare District Board of Directors. The bill would require the initial board of directors to recommend a permanent funding source mechanism to be presented to and approved by voters via ballot measure. The bill would require the initial board of directors to enter negotiations with El Centro Regional Medical Center to decide the terms of the acquisition of the hospital. The bill would require the initial board of directors to finalize the terms of the acquisition by November 5, 2024. The bill would require the City of El Centro to negotiate in good faith with the Imperial Valley Healthcare District. The bill would require the board of directors to hold a minimum of 3 public meetings between the effective date of the bill and January 1, 2025, as specified. The bill would require the board of directors to recommend to the Imperial County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) dates for the dissolutions of the Pioneers Memorial Healthcare District and Heffernan Memorial Healthcare District and would authorize the board to recommend separate dates for each district’s dissolution. The bill would require, by January 1, 2025, the Imperial County LAFCO to dissolve the Heffernan Memorial Healthcare District and the Pioneers Memorial Healthcare District and would transfer the assets, rights, and responsibilities of the dissolved districts to the Imperial Valley Healthcare District. The bill would require, until the dissolution of both of those districts, the Heffernan Memorial Healthcare District to hold a temporary clerical role for the Board of Directors of the Imperial Valley Healthcare District, as specified. The bill would extend the terms

Page 19 of 96 ends

of the board members of the districts being dissolved until their respective dissolution date or January 1, 2025, whichever occurs first.

Organization Position
OUR BILLS Support
GONSALVES Support
El Centro Support
AB 985 (Arambula D) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District: emission reduction credit system.

Current Text: Amended: 7/6/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/15/2023
Last Amend: 7/6/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(a)(14). (Last location was CONCURRENCE on 9/12/2023)(May be acted upon Jan 2024)
Location: 9/14/2023-A. 2 YEAR

Summary: Current law requires the board of every air district to establish by regulation a system by which all reductions in the emission of air contaminants that are to be used to offset certain future increases in the emission of air contaminants be banked prior to use to offset future increases in emissions, except as specified. Current law requires the State Air Resources Board to develop and adopt a methodology for use by air districts to calculate the value of credits issued for emission reductions from stationary, mobile, indirect, and areawide sources when those credits are used interchangeably, consistent with certain requirements. Current law also requires the state board to periodically update the methodology as it applies to future transactions, if necessary. Current law provides for the establishment of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District vested with the authority to regulate air emissions from stationary sources located in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. This bill would require the state board, except as provided, to conduct an analysis of each credit identified in the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District’s ledger of available emission reduction credits to determine if any credits were issued in violation of state, local, or district laws, rules, regulations, or procedures in place at the time of original issuance, and to complete the analysis no later than January 1, 2027. The bill would require, upon completion of the analysis, the state board to submit a report to the Legislature that includes a summary of the results of the analysis.

Organization Position
Kerman Oppose
AB 1027 (Petrie-Norris D) Social media platforms: drug safety policies.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/15/2023
Last Amend: 8/15/2023
Status: 10/13/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 824, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/13/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, an initiative measure, grants to a consumer various rights with respect to personal information, as defined, that is collected by a business, as defined. The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, amended, added to, and reenacted the CCPA. Current law requires a social media company, as defined, to submit reports, as specified, starting no later than January 1, 2024, to the Attorney General, including, but not limited to, the current version of the terms of service for each social media platform owned or operated by the company, specified categories of content and what policies the social media company has for that platform to address that content, and data related to violations of the terms of service for each platform. Current law requires the Attorney General to make all terms of service reports submitted pursuant to those provisions available to the public in a searchable repository on its official internet website. This bill would add to those categories of content the distribution of controlled substances.

Organization Position
Palmdale Support
AB 1034 (Wilson D) Law enforcement: facial recognition and other biometric surveillance.

Current Text: Amended: 5/1/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/15/2023
Last Amend: 5/1/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/11/2023)(May be acted upon Jan 2024)
Location: 9/14/2023-S. 2 YEAR Page 20 of 96

Summary: Would prohibit a law enforcement agency or law enforcement officer from installing, activating, or using any biometric surveillance system in connection with an officer camera or data collected by an officer camera. The bill would authorize a person to bring an action for equitable or declaratory relief against a law enforcement agency or officer who violates that prohibition.

Organization Position
Chino Oppose
Norwalk Oppose
AB 1175 (Quirk-Silva D) Outdoor advertising displays: redevelopment agency project areas.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 361, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/7/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The Outdoor Advertising Act provides for the regulation by the Department of Transportation of an advertising display, as defined, within view of public highways. The act regulates the placement of an off-premises advertising display along highways that generally advertises business conducted or services rendered or goods produced or sold at a location other than the property where the display is located. The act does not apply to an on-premises advertising display, which generally advertises business conducted or services rendered or goods produced or sold at the location where the display is located. However, until January 1, 2023, the act treats an off-premises advertising display developed as part of and within the boundary limits of a redevelopment agency project, as those boundaries existed on December 29, 2011, as an on-premises advertising display if it meets certain criteria, subject to an extension beyond January 1, 2023, not to exceed the expiration of the redevelopment project area, upon a showing of good cause, as specified, to the department by the applicable city, county, or city and county. Current law requires the advertising copy of these advertising displays within redevelopment agency boundary limits to advertise only the businesses or activities operating within those boundary limits, imposes other related display requirements, and requires a city, county, or city and county to annually certify to the department that these advertising copy requirements are met. Current law requires that a redevelopment area advertising display be removed by January 1, 2023, or by the end of any applicable extension, unless it qualifies as a lawful display under the act, without the payment of any compensation to the owner or operator.

This bill would, instead, treat an off-premises advertising display within the boundary limits of a redevelopment agency project, as detailed above, that meets the applicable criteria as an on-premises advertising display until January 1, 2026, would eliminate the authorization for an extension for good cause, would eliminate the requirements regarding advertising copy, and would eliminate the explicit requirement that the display be removed without compensation to the owner or operator.

Organization Position
GONSALVES Support
OUR BILLS Support
Hawaiian Gardens SUPP - NL
Signal Hill SUPP - NL
Milpitas Support
South Gate SUPP - NL
AB 1213 (Ortega D) Workers’ compensation: aggregate disability payments.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Current law establishes a workers’ compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers’ Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries sustained in the course of their employment. Current law requires every employer to establish a utilization review process, as described, and establishes an independent medical review process to resolve disputes over a utilization review decision, as specified. Current law requires that aggregate disability payments for a single injury occurring on or after certain dates be limited, as provided.

This bill, from January 1, 2024, until January 1, 2027, would require that if a denial of treatment requested by a treating physician is subsequently overturned by independent medical review or by the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, any temporary disability to which the employee is entitled to receive or becomes entitled to receive from the date of the

Page 21 of 96 ends

denial until the treatment is authorized would not be included in the calculation of the aggregate disability payments, as specified.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Oppose
AB 1215 (Carrillo, Wendy D) Pets Assistance With Support Grant Program: homeless shelters: domestic violence shelters: pets.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/7/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Would require the Department of Housing and Community Development, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to develop and administer the Pets Assistance With Support Grant Program (PAWS), to award grants to qualified homeless shelters and qualified domestic violence shelters, as defined. The bill would require grant recipients to meet certain availability and service requirements as they relate to the pets of people experiencing homelessness and people escaping domestic violence. The bill would authorize the department to use up to 7% of the funds appropriated in the annual Budget Act for those purposes for its costs in administering the program.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
Norwalk Support
AB 1216 (Muratsuchi D) Wastewater treatment plants: monitoring of air pollutants.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 8/16/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 675, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would require, on or before January 1, 2027, the owner or operator of a wastewater treatment facility that is located within 1,500 feet of a residential area and has an original design capacity of 425,000,000 gallons or more per day to develop, install, operate, and maintain a wastewater treatment-related fence-line monitoring system approved by the appropriate air quality management district. The bill would require the wastewater treatment-related fence-line monitoring system to include equipment capable of measuring pollutants of concern, as provided, emitted into the atmosphere that the appropriate air quality management district deems appropriate for monitoring. The bill would provide that it does not alter the responsibility of an owner or operator of a wastewater treatment facility to not exceed limits for nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds emitted into the atmosphere established in existing air quality regulations, as provided, and would require source testing for these pollutants to be conducted pursuant to a protocol approved by the appropriate air quality management district.

Organization Position
GONSALVES Support
HOT BILLS Support
El Segundo Support
AQMD Support

Page 22 of 96 ends

AB 1308 (Quirk-Silva D) Planning and Zoning Law: single-family residences: parking requirements.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 3/30/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 756, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative body of any county or city to adopt ordinances that regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land as between industry, business, residences, open space, and other purposes. This bill would prohibit a public agency, as defined, from increasing the minimum parking requirement that applies to a single-family residence as a condition of approval of a project to remodel, renovate, or add to a single-family residence, except as specified. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Organization Position
Santa Clarita Oppose
AB 1403 (Garcia D) Public safety: fireworks: enforcement: funding.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 368, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/7/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law requires the State Fire Marshal to classify all fireworks and pyrotechnic devices and prohibits any fireworks or pyrotechnic devices from being imported, sold, or offered for sale before the fireworks or devices have been examined and classified by the State Fire Marshal. Current law authorizes the State Fire Marshal to issue licenses related to fireworks and pyrotechnic devices, including a wholesaler’s license. Current law makes it unlawful for a person to violate the State Fireworks Law and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, and to possess a specified amount of dangerous fireworks, punishable by a fine or by imprisonment, as specified. This bill would increase the amounts of the fines to be imposed for violating the State Fireworks Law or related regulation, would increase the amount of certain fines for possessing specified amounts of dangerous fireworks, and would increase the amount of certain fines for selling, giving, or delivering dangerous fireworks to any person under 18 years in age.

Organization Position
Elk Grove Support

TNT SUPP - NL
Norwalk Support
OUR BILLS Support
AB 1423 (Schiavo D) Product safety: PFAS: artificial turf or synthetic surfaces.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 10/8/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Would prohibit, except as provided and commencing January 1, 2026, a public entity, including a charter city, charter county, city, or county, any public or private school serving pupils in kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, a public institution of higher education, other than the University of California, or a private institution of higher education from purchasing or installing a covered surface containing regulated PFAS, as defined.

Organization Position

OCWD SUPP - NL
AB 1465 (Wicks D) Nonvehicular air pollution: civil penalties.

Current Text: Amended: 7/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 7/13/2023

Page 23 of 96 ends

Status: 9/14/2023-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/6/2023)(May be acted upon Jan 2024)
Location: 9/14/2023-S. 2 YEAR

Summary: Current law prohibits a person from discharging from nonvehicular sources air contaminants or other materials that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to the public, or that endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of the public, or that cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property, as specified. Current law establishes maximum civil penalties for a person who violates air pollution laws from nonvehicular sources. Current law provides that civil penalties for specified violations are to be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought by the Attorney General, by any district attorney, or by the attorney for any district in which the violation occurs. This bill would triple specified civil penalties if the violation results from a discharge from a stationary source required by federal law to be included in an operating permit program established pursuant to specified provisions of the federal Clean Air Act, and the discharge contains or includes one or more air contaminants, as specified. The bill would define “source” for this purpose. The bill would require, in assessing penalties, that health impacts, community disruptions, and other circumstances related to the violation be considered, as specified.

Organization Position
Carson Support
AQMD Support
AB 1469 (Kalra D) Santa Clara Valley Water District.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 729, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The Santa Clara Valley Water District Act creates the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and authorizes the district to provide for the conservation and management of flood, storm, and recycled waters, and other waters, for beneficial uses and to enhance natural resources in connection with carrying out the purposes of the district. This bill would additionally authorize the district to take certain actions in order to assist unsheltered people living along streams, in riparian corridors, or otherwise within the district’s jurisdiction, in consultation with a city or the County of Santa Clara to provide solutions or improve outcomes for the unsheltered individuals. The bill would require, if the district elects to use the above-described authority, the district to provide a report to the appropriate committees of the Legislature on or before July 1, 2029, and a subsequent report on or before July 1, 2034, containing specified information, including, among other things, the district’s actions taken to assist unsheltered people. The bill would provide that the use of land by the district for these specified actions constitutes “agency’s use” for purposes of the prescribed requirements related to the disposal of surplus land by a local agency, and would make this provision operative only if SB 747 of the 2023–24 Regular Session is enacted as provided. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position
Cupertino Support
AB 1484 (Zbur D) Temporary public employees.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 691, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: This bill would impose specified requirements with respect to the temporary employees of a public employer who have been hired to perform the same or similar type of work that is performed by permanent employees represented by a recognized employee organization, subject to limited exceptions. In this regard the bill would require those temporary employees to be automatically included in the same bargaining unit as the permanent employees if the requested classification of temporary employees is not presently within the unit. The bill would further require the public employer to promptly participate in collective bargaining to establish certain employment conditions for the newly added temporary employees if the parties’ current memorandum of understanding does not address them, as specified. The bill would also require a public employer to, upon hire, provide each temporary employee with their job description, wage rates, and eligibility for benefits, anticipated length of employment, and procedures to apply for open, permanent positions. By imposing new duties on local agencies that employ temporary employees, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require complaints alleging a violation of its provisions to be processed as unfair practice charges under the act. The bill would additionally include the same findings and declarations as set forth above. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position

Page 24 of 96 ends

Norwalk Oppose
Fairfield Oppose
Thousand Oaks Oppose
AB 1490 (Lee D) Affordable housing development projects: adaptive reuse.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 7/10/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 764, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Under this bill, a housing development that is, among other requirements, an extremely affordable adaptive reuse project on an infill parcel that is not located on or adjoined to a site where more than 1/3 of the square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use, as specified, would be an allowable use. The bill would authorize a local agency to impose objective design review standards, except as specified. The bill would authorize a local agency to deny the project if it is proposed to be located on a site or adjoined to any site where any of the square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use and the local agency makes written findings that approving the development would have an adverse effect on public health and safety. The bill would provide that for purposes of the Housing Accountability Act, a proposed housing development project is consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if the housing development project is consistent with the standards specified in these provisions. The bill would require a local agency to determine whether the proposed development meets those standards within specified timeframes. The bill would define an “extremely affordable adaptive reuse project” for these purposes to mean a multifamily housing development project that involves retrofitting and repurposing of a residential or commercial building that currently allows temporary dwelling or occupancy, and that meets specified affordability requirements, including that 100% of the units be dedicated to lower income households, 50% of which shall be dedicated to very low income households, as specified. Because the bill would require local officials to provide a higher level of service, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position
Whittier Oppose
Santa Clarita Oppose
Thousand Oaks Oppose

LEAGUE OUA
Rosemead OUA
AB 1505 (Rodriguez D) Seismic retrofitting: soft story multifamily housing.

Current Text: Amended: 7/3/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 7/3/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator McGuire.

Location: 9/14/2023-S. INACTIVE FILE

Summary: Current law establishes the Seismic Retrofitting Program for Soft Story Multifamily Housing for the purposes of providing financial assistance to owners of soft story multifamily housing for seismic retrofitting to protect individuals living in multifamily housing that have been determined to be at risk of collapse in earthquakes, as specified.

Current law also establishes the Seismic Retrofitting Program for Soft Story Multifamily Housing Fund, and its subsidiary account, the Seismic Retrofitting Account, within the State Treasury. Current law provides that the Legislature will appropriate $250,000,000 from the General Fund in the 2023–24 Budget Act to the Seismic Retrofitting Program for Soft Story Multifamily Housing Fund for the purposes of carrying out the program. Current law requires the CRMP to develop and administer the program, as specified. Existing law makes these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2042, and repeals them as of January 1, 2043. Current federal law, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, establishes various grant opportunities, including the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program, to support hazard mitigation projects. This bill would remove the requirement for the Legislature to appropriate $250,000,000 from the General Fund in the 2023–24 Budget Act to the Seismic Retrofitting Program for Soft Story Multifamily Housing Fund. The bill would authorize the Office of Emergency Services to dedicate federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities application funding to specified projects to augment and support the Seismic Retrofitting Program for Soft Story Multifamily Housing. Page 25 of 96
Organization Position
Carson Support
La Puente SUPP - NL
Paramount SUPP - NL
Lakewood Support
Thousand Oaks Support
AB 1572 (Friedman D) Potable water: nonfunctional turf.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/5/2023
Status: 10/13/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 849, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/13/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would make legislative findings and declarations concerning water use, including that the use of potable water to irrigate nonfunctional turf is wasteful and incompatible with state policy relating to climate change, water conservation, and reduced reliance on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem. The bill would direct all appropriate state agencies to encourage and support the elimination of irrigation of nonfunctional turf with potable water. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

Organization Position
Milpitas OPP - NL
AB 1594 (Garcia D) Medium- and heavy-duty zero-emission vehicles: public agency utilities.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 585, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law establishes the Air Quality Improvement Program that is administered by the State Air Resources Board for purposes of funding projects related to, among other things, the reduction of criteria air pollutants and improvement of air quality, and establishes the Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero-Emission Vehicle Fleet Purchasing Assistance Program within the Air Quality Improvement Program to make financing tools and nonfinancial supports available to operators of medium- and heavy-duty vehicle fleets to enable those operators to transition their fleets to zero-emission vehicles. This bill would require any state regulation that seeks to require, or otherwise compel, the procurement of medium- and heavy-duty zero-emission vehicles to authorize public agency utilities to purchase replacements for traditional utility-specialized vehicles that are at the end of life when needed to maintain reliable service and respond to major foreseeable events, including severe weather, wildfires, natural disasters, and physical attacks, as specified. The bill would define a public agency utility to include a local publicly owned electric utility, a community water system, a water district, and a wastewater treatment provider, as specified.

Organization Position
OCWD Support
Banning SUPP - NL
AB 1631 (Schiavo D) Water resources: permit to appropriate: application procedure: mining use.

Current Text: Vetoed: 9/30/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Status: 9/30/2023-Vetoed by Governor.

Location: 9/30/2023-A. VETOED

Summary: Under existing law, the State Water Resources Control Board administers a water rights program pursuant to which the board grants permits and licenses to appropriate water. Existing law requires an application for a permit to appropriate water to include, among other things, sufficient information to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that unappropriated water is available for the proposed appropriation. Existing law requires the board to issue and deliver a notice of an application as soon as practicable after the receipt of an application for a permit to appropriate water that conforms to the law. Existing law allows interested persons to file a written protest with regard to an application to appropriate water and requires the protestant to set forth the objections to the application. Existing law declares that no hearing is necessary to issue a permit in connection with an unprotested application, or if the undisputed facts support the issuance of the permit and there is no disputed issue of material fact, unless the board elects to hold a hearing. This bill, if the board has not rendered a final determination on an application for a permit to appropriate water for a beneficial use

Page 26 of 96 ends

or uses that include mining use within 30 years from the date the application was filed, would require the board to issue a new notice and provide an opportunity for protests before rendering a final determination, with specified exceptions.

Organization Position
GONSALVES Support
OUR BILLS Support
Santa Clarita Support
AB 1637 (Irwin D) Local government: internet websites and email addresses.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 6/29/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 586, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would, no later than January 1, 2029, require a local agency, as defined, that maintains an internet website for use by the public to ensure that the internet website utilizes a “.gov” top-level domain or a “.ca.gov” second-level domain and would require a local agency that maintains an internet website that is noncompliant with that requirement to redirect that internet website to a domain name that does utilize a “.gov” or “.ca.gov” domain. This bill, no later than January 1, 2029, would also require a local agency that maintains public email addresses to ensure that each email address provided to its employees utilizes a “.gov” domain name or a “.ca.gov” domain name. By adding to the duties of local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Organization Position
Jurupa Valley Oppose
Elk Grove Oppose
Roseville Oppose
Lakewood OPP - NL
Cerritos Oppose
AB 1679 (Santiago D) Transactions and use taxes: County of Los Angeles: homelessness.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 8/14/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 731, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law authorizes cities and counties, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax for general or specific purposes, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in the county not exceed 2%. Current local transactions and use tax law for the County of Los Angeles, known as Measure H, establishes a local tax at a rate of 0.25%, and the revenue from that tax is dedicated to addressing and preventing homelessness. This bill would authorize the County of Los Angeles to impose a transactions and use tax at a rate of no more than 0.50% that, in combination with other transactions and use taxes, would exceed the above-described combined rate limit of 2%, if the county adopts an ordinance proposing the tax and the ordinance proposing the tax is approved by the voters, subject to applicable voter approval requirements. The bill would also require all revenue from the tax to be dedicated to addressing and preventing homelessness, as provided, and would require the local ordinance, upon approval by the electorate, to repeal Measure H. The bill would specify that a transactions and use tax established pursuant to its provisions would not be considered for purposes of the 2% combined rate limitation.

Organization Position
Norwalk OUA
Lakewood OUA
Paramount OUA
Whittier OUA Page 27 of 96
ACA 13 (Ward D) Voting thresholds.

Current Text: Chaptered: 11/2/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 7/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/11/2023
Status: 11/2/2023-Chaptered by Secretary of State- Chapter 176, Statutes of 2023 Location: 11/2/2023-A. CHAPTERED

Summary: The California Constitution provides that a proposed constitutional amendment and a statewide initiative measure each take effect only if approved by a majority of the votes cast on the amendment or measure. This measure would further provide that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure would be approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose. The measure would specify that this voter approval requirement would apply to statewide initiative measures that appear on the ballot on or after January 1, 2024.

Organization Position
Roseville Support
LEAGUE Support
Lakewood Support
Norwalk Support
Elk Grove SUPP - NL
Fairfield SUPP - NL
Irvine SUPP - NL
Kerman SUPP - NL
Norco SUPP - NL
SB 4 (Wiener D) Planning and zoning: housing development: higher education institutions and religious institutions.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 771, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law, the Zenovich-Moscone-Chacon Housing and Home Finance Act, establishes the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee within the Department of Housing and Community Development. Current law requires the committee to allocate state low-income housing tax credits in conformity with state and federal law that establishes a maximum rent that may be charged to a tenant for a project unit constructed using low-income housing tax credits. The bill would define various terms for these purposes. Among other things, the bill would require that 100% of the units, exclusive of manager units, in a housing development project eligible for approval as a use by right under these provisions be affordable to lower income households, except that 20% of the units may be for moderate-income households, and 5% of the units may be for staff of the independent institution of higher education or the religious institution that owns the land, provided that the units affordable to lower income households are offered at affordable rent, as set in an amount consistent with the rent limits established by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, or affordable housing cost, as specified. The bill would authorize the development to include ancillary uses on the ground floor of the development, as specified.

Organization Position
Chino Oppose
Santa Clarita Oppose
Thousand Oaks Oppose
Jurupa Valley Oppose

Page 28 of 96 ends

SB 14 (Grove R) Serious felonies: human trafficking.

Current Text: Chaptered: 9/25/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 9/25/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 230, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 9/25/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law defines the term "serious felony" for various purposes, including, among others, enhancing the punishment for felonies pursuant to existing sentencing provisions commonly known as the Three Strikes Law. This bill would include human trafficking of a minor within the definition of a serious felony for all purposes, including for purposes of the Three Strikes Law, except as specified. By expanding the scope of an enhancement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Organization Position
Santa Clarita Support
SB 19 (Seyarto R) Fentanyl Misuse and Overdose Prevention Task Force.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/13/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 857, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/13/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, establish the Fentanyl Misuse and Overdose Prevention Task Force to undertake various duties relating to fentanyl misuse including, among others, collecting and organizing data on the nature and extent of fentanyl misuse in California and evaluating approaches to increase public awareness of fentanyl misuse. The bill would require the task force to be co-chaired by the Attorney General and the State Public Health Officer or their designees, and would specify the membership of the task force. The bill would require the first meeting of the task force to take place no later than June 1, 2024, and would require the task force to meet at least once every 2 months. The bill would require the task force to submit an interim report on its findings and recommendations to the Attorney General, the Governor, and the Legislature by July 1, 2025, and submit a final report by December 1, 2025.

The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2026.

Organization Position
Norwalk Support
Thousand Oaks Support
SB 35 (Umberg D) Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Court Program.

Current Text: Chaptered: 9/30/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 9/30/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 283, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 9/30/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would authorize the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act proceedings to be conducted by a superior court judge or by a court-appointed commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer. The bill would require that there is no fee for filing a petition nor any fees charged by any public officer for services in filing or serving papers or for the performance of any duty enjoined by the CARE Act. The bill would authorize that the respondent is entitled to have an interpreter in all proceedings if necessary for the respondent’s full participation. This bill would require county behavioral health agencies to provide health information necessary to support findings in the filings to the court, as specified, and would exempt counties and their employees from civil or criminal liability for disclosure under these provisions. By increasing the reporting duties on county behavioral health agencies, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

Organization Position
Folsom Oppose
SB 43 (Eggman D) Behavioral health.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/5/2022
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 637, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-S. CHAPTERED
Summary: The Lanterman-Petris-Short Act provides for the involuntary commitment and treatment of a person who is a

Page 29 of 96 ends

danger to themselves or others or who is gravely disabled. Current law, for purposes of involuntary commitment, defines “gravely disabled” as either a condition in which a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is unable to provide for their basic personal needs for food, clothing, or shelter or has been found mentally incompetent, as specified. This bill expands the definition of “gravely disabled” to also include a condition in which a person, as a result of a severe substance use disorder, or a co-occurring mental health disorder and a severe substance use disorder, is, in addition to the basic personal needs described above, unable to provide for their personal safety or necessary medical care, as defined.

Organization Position
Cupertino SUPP - NL
Whittier Support
Thousand Oaks SUPP - NL
South Gate SUPP - NL
Jurupa Valley Support
Rosemead Support
Norwalk Support
Milpitas SUPP - NL
Fairfield Support
Roseville Support
SB 55 (Umberg D) Vehicles: catalytic converters.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/6/2022
Last Amend: 7/5/2023
Status: 10/13/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 858, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/13/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law requires a core recycler that accepts, ships, or sells used catalytic converters to maintain specified information regarding the purchase and sale of the catalytic converters. Current law prohibits a core recycler from providing payment for a catalytic converter unless, among other requirements, the payment is made by check, as specified. This bill, in addition to payment by check, would allow for payment by credit card or any other form of traceable payment other than cash.

Organization Position
Chino Support
SB 58 (Wiener D) Controlled substances: decriminalization of certain hallucinogenic substances.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 12/16/2022
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Vetoed by the Governor. In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.

Location: 10/7/2023-S. VETOED

Summary: Would, on and after January 1, 2025, make lawful the possession, preparation, obtaining, or transportation of, specified quantities of psilocybin, psilocyn, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), and mescaline, for personal use, as defined, by and with persons 21 years of age or older. The bill would provide penalties for possession of these substances on school grounds, or possession by, or transferring to, persons under 21 years of age.

Organization Position
Norwalk Oppose

Page 30 of 96 ends

SB 244 (Eggman D) Right to Repair Act.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/10/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 1/25/2023
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/10/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 704, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/10/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: The Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act provides a comprehensive set of procedures for the enforcement of express and implied warranties on consumer goods, as defined. Under current law, every manufacturer making an express warranty with respect to an electronic or appliance product, including televisions, radios, audio or video recording equipment, major home appliances, antennas, and rotators, with a wholesale price to the retailer of not less than $50 nor more than $99.99 is required to make available to service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and functional parts to effect the repair of the product for at least 3 years after the date a product model or type was manufactured, regardless of whether the 3-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product. Current law also requires every manufacturer making an express warranty with respect to an electronic or appliance product, as described above, with a wholesale price to the retailer of $100 or more, to make available to service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and functional parts to effect the repair of the product for at least 7 years after the date a product model or type was manufactured, regardless of whether the 7-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product. This bill would enact the Right to Repair Act. The bill would require, except as specified and regardless of whether any express warranty is made, the manufacturer of an above-described electronic or appliance product, in the above-described circumstances, and in those same circumstances but sold to others outside of direct retail sales, to make available, on fair and reasonable terms, to product owners, service and repair facilities, and service dealers, the means, as described, to effect the diagnosis, maintenance, or repair of the product, as provided.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
SB 303 (Allen D) Solid waste: Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/8/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/2/2023
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by the Governor. In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.

Location: 10/8/2023-S. VETOED

Summary: The Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act prohibits a producer from selling, offering for sale, importing, or distributing covered materials in the state unless the producer is approved to participate in the producer responsibility plan of a producer responsibility organization (PRO), as prescribed, for the source reduction, collection, processing, and recycling of covered material, except as provided. The act requires the department to establish a producer responsibility advisory board for specified purposes. The act authorizes an affected entity that asserts that specific actions taken to meet the requirements of the act are disrupting or otherwise adversely affecting the sustained operation or commercial viability of solid waste collection programs, solid waste recycling facilities, or composting facilities providing services in accordance with local solid waste handling requirements, to bring the concern and evidence supporting that assertion to the advisory board for discussion and to ask the advisory board to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the information. If the evaluation demonstrates that specific actions are disrupting or otherwise adversely affecting existing operations, the act requires the advisory board to submit the concern to the department for further analysis. The act requires the department to analyze the information provided by the advisory board and authorizes the department to offer a recommendation for resolution. This bill would instead authorize an affected entity that asserts that specific actions taken by the PRO, a producer, or an entity under contract with the PRO are not consistent with specified prohibitions and requirements of the act and are disrupting or otherwise adversely affecting the sustained operation or commercial viability of solid waste collection programs, solid waste recycling facilities, or composting facilities providing services in accordance with local solid waste handling requirements to bring that concern and supporting evidence to the advisory board. The bill would delete the requirement that the board submit the concern to the department for further analysis and would instead require that the advisory board, rather than the department, offer a recommendation for resolution within 90 days of submission of the request for a preliminary evaluation. The bill would thereafter authorize either party to initiate nonbinding arbitration, as specified. The bill would specify the duties and the authority of the arbitrator, as described, including requiring the arbitrator to transmit the proposed decision to the department and the advisory board. The bill would require the department to review the arbitrator’s proposed decision within 60 days of receipt and to make a specified determination. If the arbitrator proposes a revision to an approved producer responsibility plan, the bill would require the department to publicly notice the proposed plan revision on its internet website, as provided.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support Page 31 of 96
SB 321 (Ashby D) Literacy: libraries: Local Public Library Partnership Program.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/6/2023
Last Amend: 6/30/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 598, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law authorizes the State Librarian to give advisory, consultive, and technical assistance with respect to public libraries to librarians and library authorities, and assist all other authorities, state and local, in assuming their full responsibility for library services. This bill would establish the Local Public Library Partnership Program, under the administration of the State Librarian, for purposes of ensuring that all pupils have access to a local public library by 3rd grade.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
SB 389 (Allen D) State Water Resources Control Board: investigation of water right.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/8/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/9/2023
Last Amend: 8/31/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 486, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/8/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law provides generally for the appropriation of water. Existing law authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board to investigate bodies of water, to take testimony in regard to the rights to water or the use of water, and to ascertain whether or not water is appropriated lawfully, as provided. Under current law, the diversion or use of water other than as authorized by specified provisions of law is a trespass, subject to specified civil liability. This bill would instead authorize the board to investigate and ascertain whether or not a water right is valid. The bill would authorize the board to issue an information order in furtherance of an investigation, as executed by the executive director of the board, as specified. The bill would authorize a diversion or use of water ascertained to be unauthorized to be enforced as a trespass, as specified.

Organization Position
Roseville OPP - NL
OCWD Removed Opp
SB 410 (Becker D) Powering Up Californians Act.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/9/2023
Last Amend: 9/11/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 394, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/7/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission), in collaboration with the State Air Resources Board, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), and other relevant stakeholders, to annually gather from state agencies, as provided, specified entities’ fleet data for on-road and off-road vehicles in the medium- and heavy-duty sectors and share that data with electrical corporations to help inform electrical grid planning efforts, as specified. Current law requires electrical corporations, as part of their distribution planning processes, to consider that produced fleet data, and other available data, to facilitate the readiness of their distribution systems to support the state’s anticipated level of electric vehicle charging, as specified. This bill, the Powering Up Californians Act, would require the PUC to establish, on or before September 30, 2024, reasonable average and maximum target energization time periods, as defined, and a procedure for customers to report energization delays to the PUC, as provided. The bill would require the PUC to require the electrical corporation to take remedial actions necessary to achieve the PUC’s targets and would require all reports to be publicly available, among other reporting requirements.

Organization Position
AQMD Support
SB 411 (Portantino D) Open meetings: teleconferences: neighborhood councils.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/9/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/9/2023
Last Amend: 8/14/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 605, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/9/2023-S. CHAPTERED
Summary: Would, until January 1, 2026, authorize an eligible legislative body to use alternate teleconferencing

Page 32 of 96 ends

provisions related to notice, agenda, and public participation, as prescribed, if the city council has adopted an authorizing resolution and 2/3 of an eligible legislative body votes to use the alternate teleconferencing provisions. The bill would define “eligible legislative body” for this purpose to mean a neighborhood council that is an advisory body with the purpose to promote more citizen participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs that is established pursuant to the charter of a city with a population of more than 3,000,000 people that is subject to the act.

The bill would require an eligible legislative body authorized under the bill to provide publicly accessible physical locations for public participation, as prescribed. The bill would also require that at least a quorum of the members of the neighborhood council participate from locations within the boundaries of the city in which the neighborhood council is established. The bill would require that, at least once per year, at least a quorum of the members of the eligible legislative body participate in person from a singular physical location that is open to the public and within the boundaries of the eligible legislative body.

Organization Position
ACCESS Support
SB 423 (Wiener D) Land use: streamlined housing approvals: multifamily housing developments.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 778, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would authorize the Department of General Services to act in the place of a locality or local government, at the discretion of that department, for purposes of the ministerial, streamlined review for development in compliance with the specified-described requirements on property owned by or leased to the state. The bill would extend the operation of the streamlined, ministerial approval process to January 1, 2036. The bill would provide that the streamlined, ministerial approval process does not apply to applications for developments proposed on qualified sites, defined as a site that is located within an equine or equestrian district and meets certain other requirements, that are submitted on or after January 1, 2024, but before July 1, 2025. This bill would modify the specified-described objective planning standards, including by revising the standard that prohibits a multifamily housing development from being subject to the streamlined, ministerial approval process if the development is located in a coastal zone to apply only if the development located in the coastal zone meets any one of specified conditions. The bill would require that a development located in a coastal zone that satisfies the specified conditions obtain a coastal development permit. The bill would require a local government to approve a coastal development permit if it determines that the development is consistent with all objective standards of the local government’s certified local coastal program, as specified. The bill would provide that the changes made by this act would apply in a coastal zone on or after January 1, 2025 This bill would modify the objective planning standard that prohibits a development subject to the streamlined, ministerial approval process from being located in a high fire severity zone by deleting the prohibition for a development to be located within a high or very high fire hazard severity zone as indicated on maps adopted by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and would instead prohibit a development from being located with the state responsibility area, as defined, unless the site has adopted specified standards. The bill would also remove an exception for sites excluded from specified hazard zones by a local agency, as specified.

Organization Position
Lakewood Oppose
Indian Wells Oppose
Fairfield Oppose
Thousand Oaks Oppose
Wildomar Oppose
Elk Grove Oppose
Rosemead Oppose
Simi Valley Oppose
Bellflower OPP - NL
Fontana OPP - NL
Glendora OPP - NL Page 33 of 96
Kerman OPP - NL
La Mirada OPP - NL
Palm Desert OPP - NL
Paramount OPP - NL
Redding OPP - NL
Whittier OPP - NL
Chino Oppose
Carson Oppose
Santa Clarita Oppose
YIMBY Support
LEAGUE Oppose
Jurupa Valley Oppose
Norwalk Oppose
Folsom Oppose
Milpitas OPP - NL
Cerritos Oppose
SB 450 (Atkins D) Housing development: approvals.

Current Text: Amended: 9/1/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/13/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 9/14/2023-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(a)(14). (Last location was INACTIVE FILE on 9/14/2023)(May be acted upon Jan 2024)
Location: 9/14/2023-A. 2 YEAR

Summary: Current law requires a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including that the proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided. Current law authorizes a local agency to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, except as specified, on the proposed housing development. Current law authorizes a local agency to deny a proposed housing development if specified conditions are met, including that the building official makes a written finding that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment, as provided. This bill would remove the requirement that a proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls to be considered ministerially. The bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that do not apply uniformly to development within the underlying zone, but would specify that these provisions do not prohibit a local agency from adopting or imposing objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards on the development if the standards are more permissive than applicable standards within the underlying zone. The bill would remove the authorization for a local agency to deny a proposed housing development if the building official makes a written finding that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the physical environment. The bill would require the local agency to consider and approve or deny the proposed housing development application within 60 days from the date the local agency receives the completed application, and would deem the application approved after that time.

Organization Position

Page 34 of 96 ends

Santa Clarita Oppose
LosAltHls Oppose
SB 525 (Durazo D) Minimum wages: health care workers.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/14/2023
Last Amend: 9/11/2023
Status: 10/13/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 890, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/13/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law generally requires the minimum wage for all industries to not be less than specified amounts to be increased until it is $15 per hour commencing January 1, 2022, for employers employing 26 or more employees, and commencing January 1, 2023, for employers employing 25 or fewer employees. Current law makes a violation of minimum wage requirements a misdemeanor. This bill would establish 5 separate minimum wage schedules for covered health care employees, as defined, depending on the nature of the employer.

Organization Position
Norwalk Support
SB 602 (Archuleta D) Trespass.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/7/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/15/2023
Last Amend: 8/24/2023
Status: 10/7/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 404, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/7/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law makes it a misdemeanor to commit the crime of trespass, which includes refusing or failing to leave land, real property, or structures belonging to, or lawfully occupied by, another and not open to the general public upon being requested to leave by a peace officer at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession and upon being informed by the peace officer that they are acting at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession. Current law requires the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession to make a separate request to the peace officer on each occasion when the peace officer’s assistance in dealing with a trespass is requested, except that a single request for peace officer assistance may be made for a period not to exceed 12 months when the premises or property is closed to the public and posted as being closed. Current law requires the requester to inform the law enforcement agency to which the request was made when the assistance is no longer desired before the 12-month period expires. Current law also authorizes a single request for a peace officer’s assistance to be made for a period of time not to exceed 30 days and identified by specific dates when there is a fire hazard or the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession is absent from the property. Under current law, a request for assistance expires when ownership of the property changes or upon a change in the person in lawful possession. This bill would authorize a single request for assistance to be made and submitted electronically, in a notarized form provided by the law enforcement agency, to a peace officer.

Organization Position
Bellflower Support
Paramount Support
Lakewood Support
Wildomar Support
Rosemead Support
Banning SUPP - NL
Hawaiian Gardens SUPP - NL

LEAGUE SUPP - NL
Whittier Support
Norwalk Support
Thousand Oaks Support Page 35 of 96
SB 641 (Roth D) Public health: alcohol and drug programs: naloxone.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/8/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 9/1/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by the Governor. In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.

Location: 10/8/2023-S. VETOED

Summary: The Naloxone Distribution Project (NDP) is administratively created by the State Department of Health Care Services to reduce opioid-related overdose deaths. This bill would require the State Department of Health Care Services within the California Health and Human Services Agency, as part of the NDP, to make all United States Food and Drug Administration-approved formulations and dosage strengths of naloxone or any other opioid antagonist that are indicated for the emergency treatment of known or suspected opioid overdose available through the NDP, as specified. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations.

Organization Position
Palmdale Support
SB 665 (Allen D) Plastic waste: single-use plastics alternatives: working group.

Current Text: Vetoed: 10/8/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Vetoed by the Governor. In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.

Location: 10/8/2023-S. VETOED

Summary: Current law establishes the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, which covers certain single-use packaging and plastic single-use food service ware, as provided. As part of its comprehensive statutory scheme, the act requires the producers, as defined, of these covered materials to source reduce plastic covered material, to ensure that covered material offered for sale, distributed, or imported in or into the state on or after January 1, 2032, is recyclable or eligible to be labeled “compostable,” and to ensure that plastic covered material offered for sale, distributed, or imported in or into the state meets specified recycling rates. Current law vests the California Environmental Protection Agency with authority over various environmental matters and various state agencies, including the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the State Water Resources Control Board, the Department of Toxic Substances Control, and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Current law establishes the Ocean Protection Council to, among other things, coordinate activities of state agencies that are related to the protection and conservation of coastal waters and ocean ecosystems. Current law requires CalRecycle to consult with the council regarding its adoption of regulations to establish a process, and develop criteria, for determining the types of food service packaging that are reusable, recyclable, or compostable. Current law establishes the Department of Food and Agriculture to promote and protect the agricultural industry of the state. This bill would require the California Environmental Protection Agency, by January 1, 2025, to establish a working group of the above-referenced state entities that would establish a framework, by July 1, 2026, for evaluating novel plastic and plastic-alternative material types used to produce single-use products as they are developed, in order to inform state policy decisions designed to create a more sustainable and circular economy, as provided.

Organization Position
Thousand Oaks Support
SB 706 (Caballero D) Public contracts: progressive design-build: local agencies.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/8/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 6/28/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 500, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/8/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law, until January 1, 2029, authorizes local agencies, defined as any city, county, city and county, or special district authorized by law to provide for the production, storage, supply, treatment, or distribution of any water from any source, to use the progressive design-build process for up to 15 public works projects in excess of $5,000,000 for each project, similar to the progressive design-build process authorized for use by the Director of General Services.

This bill would, until January 1, 2030, provide additional authority for cities, counties, cities and counties, or special districts to use the progressive design-build process for up to 10 public works in excess of $5,000,000, not limited to water-related projects, excluding projects on state-owned or state-operated facilities. The bill would require information to be provided under penalty of perjury and would require similar reports due no later than December 31, 2028.

Organization Position
Roseville Support

Page 36 of 96 ends

SB 710 (Durazo D) Sale of excess state highway property: State Highway Route 710 Terminus.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/8/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/16/2023
Last Amend: 6/26/2023
Status: 10/8/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 501, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/8/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law, if the Department of Transportation determines that real property, or an interest in the property, acquired for highway purposes is no longer necessary for those purposes, authorizes the department to sell or exchange the property or property interest in the manner and upon terms, standards, and conditions established by the California Transportation Commission, as provided. Current law authorizes the California Transportation Commission to relinquish a portion of State Highway Route 710. This bill would require the department to establish and administer a Terminus Regional Planning Task Force, as provided, to meet quarterly and complete and submit a report to the Legislature on the issues of traffic and potential land use related to the State Route 710 Terminus adjacent areas, as defined. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2027.

Organization Position
Rosemead Oppose
SB 745 (Cortese D) The Drought-Resistant Buildings Act.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/13/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/7/2023
Status: 10/13/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 884, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/13/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Would require the Department of General Services to research, develop, and propose building standards to reduce potable water use in new residential buildings and imposes those duties on the commission with respect to new nonresidential buildings, as specified. The bill would require the commission to perform a review of water efficiency and water reuse standards in the California Buildings Standards Code every 3 years, commencing with the next triennial edition, and update as needed.

Organization Position

OCWD OUA
SB 747 (Caballero D) Land use: surplus land.

Current Text: Chaptered: 10/11/2023 html pdf
Introduced: 2/17/2023
Last Amend: 9/8/2023
Status: 10/11/2023-Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 786, Statutes of 2023.

Location: 10/11/2023-S. CHAPTERED

Summary: Current law prescribes requirements for the disposal of surplus land by a local agency. Current law defines terms for these purposes. Existing law defines “surplus land” to generally mean land owned in fee simple by a local agency for which the local agency’s governing body takes formal action in a public meeting declaring that the land is surplus and not necessary for the agency’s use. Current law defines “agency’s use” to include land that is being used, is planned to be used pursuant to a written plan adopted by the local agency’s governing board, or is disposed of to support agency work or operations. Current law excludes from “agency’s use” commercial or industrial uses or activities, or property disposed of for the sole purpose of investment or generation of revenue, unless the local agency is a district, except as specified, and the agency’s governing body takes specified actions in a public meeting. Current law excludes from these requirements the disposal of exempt surplus land by an agency of the state or any local government. Current law requires a local agency to declare land as either surplus land or exempt surplus land, as supported by written findings, before a local agency may take any action to dispose of it. Under existing law, exempt surplus land includes, among other types of land, property that is used by a district for an “agency’s use” as expressly authorized, land for specified developments, including a mixed-use development, if put out to open, competitive bid by a local agency, as specified, and surplus land that is subject to specified valid legal restrictions. This bill would define the term “dispose” for these purposes to mean the sale of the surplus property or a lease of any surplus property entered into on or after January 1, 2024, for a term longer than 15 years, including renewal options, as specified.

Organization Position
Irvine CLT SUPP - NL
Kerman Support
Elk Grove Support

Page 37 of 96 ends

Indian Wells SUPP - NL
Palmdale SUPP - NL
Paramount Support
Lakewood Support
Bellflower SUPP - NL
Chino Support
Norwalk Support

Page 38 of 96 ends

FROM: ANTHONY, JASON AND PAUL GONSALVES
SUBJECT: UPCOMING 2024 LEGISLATIVE SESSION
DATE: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2023
As we previously reported, the Legislature adjourned the 2023 legislative session on September 14, 2023. They will return to Sacramento on January 3, 2024.

Before adjourning, the Legislature sent 1,326 bills to Governor Newsom for his consideration. Of those the Governor signed 890 bills and vetoed 156 in the month leading up to the October 14th deadline for the Governor to act on all legislation sent to him prior to the September 14th adjournment.

While things have been relatively quiet in Sacramento since, there are a few relevant issues we would like to recap as we anticipate the upcoming 2024 legislative session.

Water Rights
As we’ve previously reported, we had a successful year opposing threatening water rights bills. Two bills, AB 460 and AB 1337 failed to pass out of policy committee in the Senate and are two-year bills. A third bill, SB 389, passed with amendments that significantly limited the impact of the bill on legal diverters of water.

While we had a successful year, we do not anticipate that this issue and potentially these bills won’t be in play in 2024. We will continue to monitor the situation closely and keep you apprised of further developments.

Bonds
As previously reported, the Governor and the Legislature opted not to place any additional bonds on the March 2024 ballot as the Governor did not want the Legislature to place any additional bonds on the March 2024 ballot other than the Governor’s proposed behavioral health initiative.

Page 39 of 96 ends

The Legislature and the Governor will now have until mid-2024 to negotiate any/all bonds to be placed on the November 2024 ballot, we will continue to keep you apprised as bond negotiations ramp back up in January.

Legislative Leadership changes
The new Assembly Speaker, Robert Rivas assumed the speakership in July 2023, and he waited until adjournment of the 2023 legislative session to announce the new Committee Chairs, Vice-Chairs and Members. We expect such announcements to be made by mid-January at the latest.

The Senate democratic caucus has selected Senator Mike McGuire (DHealdsburg) to take over as Senate President Pro-Tem from Senator Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) in January. Like the Assembly this too will likely result in a wholesale shuffling of Senate Leadership and Committee assignments.

Conclusion
We would be remiss if we did not thank you and your staff for the personal and professional relationship we have enjoyed. While we are extremely proud of the accomplishments we have shared in, we personally feel a debt of gratitude to your management team for their direction, tireless efforts and partnership and we look forward to the continued opportunity to share in many future successes during the 2024 legislative session.

We expect housing, surplus land act, homelessness, public safety and the evergrowing State Budget deficit to continue to be at the forefront of legislative priorities during the upcoming legislative session and we look forward to continuing to work with you as these issues progress.

Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact our office.

Happy Veterans Day!

Page 40 of 96 ends

2024 TENTATIVE LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR

COMPILED BY THE OFFICE OF THE ASSEMBLY CHIEF CLERK AND THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE SENATE Revised 11-1-22

JANUARY

S M T W TH F S
Wk. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6
Wk. 2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Wk. 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Wk. 4 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Wk. 1 28 29 30 31

DEADLINES
Jan. 1 Statutes take effect (Art. IV, Sec. 8(c)).

Jan. 3 Legislature reconvenes (J.R. 51(a)(4)).

Jan. 10 Budget must be submitted by Governor (Art. IV, Sec. 12(a)).

Jan. 12 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to fiscal committees fiscal bills introduced in their house in the odd-numbered year (J.R. 61(b)(1)).

Jan. 15 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.

Jan. 19 Last day for any committee to hear and report to the Floor bills introduced in that house in the odd-numbered year. (J.R. 61(b)(2)).

Last day to submit bill requests to the Office of Legislative Counsel.

Jan. 31 Last day for each house to pass bills introduced in that house in the oddnumbered year (J.R. 61(b)(3)) (Art. IV, Sec. 10(c)).

FEBRUARY

S M T W TH F S
Wk. 1 1 2 3
Wk. 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Wk. 3 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Wk. 4 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Wk. 1 25 26 27 28 29
Feb. 16 Last day for bills to be introduced (J.R. 61(b)(4), J.R. 54(a)).

Feb. 19 Presidents' Day.

MARCH

S M T W TH F S
Wk. 1 1 2
Wk. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Wk. 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Wk. 4 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Spring
Recess 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Wk. 1 31
Mar. 21 Spring Recess begins upon adjournment (J.R. 51(b)(1)).

Mar. 29 Cesar Chavez Day observed.

APRIL

S M T W TH F S
Wk. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6
Wk. 2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Wk. 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Wk. 4 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Wk. 1 28 29 30
Apr. 1 Legislature reconvenes from Spring Recess (J.R. 51(b)(1)).

Apr. 26 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to fiscal committees fiscal bills introduced in their house (J.R. 61(b)(5)).

MAY

S M T W TH F S
Wk. 1 1 2 3 4
Wk. 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Wk. 3 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
No
Hrgs. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Wk. 4 26 27 28 29 30 31
May 3 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to the Floor nonfiscal bills introduced in their house (J.R. 61(b)(6)).

May 10 Last day for policy committees to meet prior to May 28 (J.R. 61(b)(7)).

May 17 Last day for fiscal committees to hear and report to the Floor bills introduced in their house (J.R. 61 (b)(8)).

Last day for fiscal committees to meet prior to May 28 (J.R. 61 (b)(9)).

May 20-24 Floor session only. No committee may meet for any purpose except for Rules Committee, bills referred pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2, and Conference Committees (J.R. 61(b)(10)).

May 24 Last day for each house to pass bills introduced in that house (J.R. 61(b)(11)).

May 27 Memorial Day.

May 28 Committee meetings may resume (J.R. 61(b)(12)).
*Holiday schedule subject to final approval by Rules Committee. Page 1 of 2 OVER

Page 41 of 96 ends

2024 TENTATIVE LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR

COMPILED BY THE OFFICE OF THE ASSEMBLY CHIEF CLERK AND THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE SENATE Revised 11-1-22
JUNE

S M T W TH F S
Wk. 4 1
Wk. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Wk. 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Wk. 3 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Wk. 4 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Wk. 1 30
June 15 Budget Bill must be passed by midnight (Art. IV, Sec. 12(c)).

June 27 Last day for a legislative measure to qualify for the Nov. 5 General Election ballot (Elections Code Sec. 9040).

JULY

S M T W TH F S
Wk. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6
Summer
Recess 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Summer
Recess 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Summer
Recess 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Summer
Recess 28 29 30 31
July 3 Last day for policy committees to meet and report bills (J.R. 61(b)(13)).

Summer Recess begins upon adjournment, provided Budget Bill has been passed (J.R. 51(b)(2)).

July 4 Independence Day.

AUGUST

S M T W TH F S
Summer
Recess 1 2 3
Wk. 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Wk. 3 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
No
Hrgs. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
No
Hrgs. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Aug. 5 Legislature reconvenes from Summer Recess (J.R. 51(b)(2)).

Aug. 16 Last day for fiscal committees to meet and report bills (J.R. 61(b)(14)).

Aug. 19 – 31 Floor session only. No committee may meet for any purpose except Rules Committee, bills referred pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2, and Conference Committees (J.R. 61(b)(15)).

Aug. 23 Last day to amend bills on the Floor (J.R. 61(b)(16)).

Aug. 31 Last day for each house to pass bills (Art. IV, Sec 10(c), J.R. 61(b)(17)).

Final Recess begins upon adjournment (J.R. 51(b)(3)).

IMPORTANT DATES OCCURRING DURING FINAL RECESS
2024
Sept. 30 Last day for Governor to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature before Sept. 1 and in the Governor's possession on or after Sept. 1 (Art. IV, Sec. 10(b)(2)).

Oct. 2 Bills enacted on or before this date take effect January 1, 2025. (Art. IV, Sec. 8(c)).

Nov. 5 General Election.

Nov. 30 Adjournment sine die at midnight (Art. IV, Sec. 3(a)).

Dec. 2 2025-26 Regular Session convenes for Organizational Session at 12 noon. (Art. IV, Sec. 3(a)).
2025
Jan. 1 Statutes take effect (Art. IV, Sec. 8(c)).
*Holiday schedule subject to final approval by Rules Committee.

Page 2 of 2 ends

TO: George Rodericks, City Manager
FROM: Anthony, Jason & Paul Gonsalves
DATE: Wednesday, January 24, 2024
SUBJECT: Legislative Update: New Year, New Leadership, and New Members The Legislature returned from interim recess on January 3, 2024, to start the second half of the 2023-24 Legislative Session. This new Legislative Session will bring significant challenges and changes to the Legislature. There’s change in Legislative leadership from previous sessions, change in Chairs and Members of committees from previous sessions, change in future legislative representation, and challenges to the State’s budget finance.

LEADERSHIP CHANGES
Former Assembly Speaker, Anthony Rendon, and current President Pro Tem of the Senate, Toni Atkins, are both in their last year of office due to term limits. Because of this, both houses have elected new leaders.

ASSEMBLY SPEAKER
Assembly Speaker, Robert Rivas, took over for former Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon in July, 2023, however, Assembly Speaker Rivas did not utilize or wield the full power of the Speaker during that time. His influence is now ramping up and will grow in the 2024 Legislative Session.

Speaker Rivas has installed many new Committee Chairs and has appointed dozens of new Members to Committees. One early, and notable, change is that Speaker Rivas has directed Committee Chairs to allow all bills referred to Committee to be eligible for a hearing in that Committee, if the author of the bill so chooses. While this changes from the policy of the previous Speaker, who had allowed Chairs to simply decide whether a bill deserved a hearing or not, it is a return to long-standing procedures of the Legislature whereby the authors could decide whether their bill is set for a hearing or not.

SENATE PRESIDENT PRO-TEM
Late in the 2023 Legislative Session, the Senate elected Senator Mike McGuire to be the next President Pro-Tem of the Senate, however, they did so without specifying a transition date. The date was worked out during the fall Legislative break and Senator McGuire will take over the Senate on February 5, 2024, thereby allowing all the two-year bills that needed to clear the house of origin to do so under the sitting leader and Committee Chairs.

Page 43 of 96 ends

Page 2 of 4 ends

Senator McGuire is a very active, hands-on Legislator. As the current Majority Floor Leader under President Pro-Tem Atkins, he manages the work flow of the Senate and is in a constant state of motion, engaging with his colleagues and being “in the know” on the matters of hand. It is expected that Senator McGuire will make changes to Chairs and Members of the Senate Committees, but at this time, it is not evident what and how substantive those changes will be.

COMMITTEE CHANGES
As noted above, Assembly Speaker Rivas has made significant changes to the Committees in the Assembly. Notable changes of significance include installing new Chairs of several prominent Committees with Members who were not previously sitting on those committees. Some of the most notable new Committee Chairs in the Assembly are as follows:
• Appropriations Chair – Assemblymember Buffy Wicks
• Budget Chair – Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel
• Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Chair, Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia • Governmental Organization Chair, Assemblymember Blanca Rubio • Housing and Community Development Chair, Chris Ward
• Local Government Chair, Assemblymember Juan Carrillo
• Natural Resources Chair, Assemblymember Isaac Bryan
• Public Employment and Retirement Chair, Assemblymember Tina McKinnor • Public Safety Chair, Assemblymember Kevin McCarty
• Revenue and Taxation Chair, Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin • Rules Chair, Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco
• Transportation Chair, Assemblymember Lori Wilson
• Utilities and Energy Chair, Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris • Water, Parks, and Wildlife Chair, Assemblymember Diane Papan

STATE BUDGET
Possibly the biggest challenge going into the 2024 Legislative Session is the fiscal health and stability of the state budget. After years of multi-billion-dollar budget surpluses, the state of California is facing an estimated $38-$68 billion budget deficit (LAO projects $68B while the Governor projects $38B). Nearly all the sitting Legislators have either served during times of Budget surpluses, or they are in their first term. Their “hard” budget decisions to date have revolved around how much money to add to programs or creating new spending programs. These Members have not had to make significant cuts to programs, nor have they had to sell their constituents on broader increases to taxes and fees to support existing spending.

When it comes to budget negotiations, the Governor generally holds the leverage. We will see if that dynamic continues under the new Leadership and new Budget Committee Chairs.

Furthermore, with all 80 members of the Assembly and half of the Senate up for election this year, we expect the Legislature to make changes to the Governor’s proposed Budget that reflects the desires of the Assembly and Senate.

ELECTORAL CHANGES

Page 44 of 96 ends

Page 3 of 4 ends

The 2024 Legislative Session will also bring change to the Legislature. As previously mentioned, all 80 Assembly seats are up for reelection along with 20 of the 40 Senate seats. Of the 120 seats in the Legislature, there are 35 Members who are termed out in 2024. A majority of these 35 Legislators are seeking a different elective office, which might be the other house, Congress, or local elective office. For those running for a different office, some of these Legislators have found themselves running against another sitting Legislator for a new office. The electoral future of some of these Legislators will be decided in the event they lose. Those moving on will find themselves in continued “campaign mode”.

Every election cycle brings a modest amount of change to the Legislature. 35 termed out Members is a large number, coupled with the 37 new Members elected in 2022. This means that 72 of the 120 Legislators will have served 2-years or less after the class of 2024 Members are sworn in. 2024 LEGISLATIVE DEADLINES
• January 1 Statutes take effect.
• January 3 Legislature reconvenes.
• January 10 Budget must be submitted by Governor.
• January 12 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to fiscal committees fiscal bills introduced in their house in the odd-numbered year. • January 19 Last day for any committee to hear and report to the Floor bills introduced in that house in the odd-numbered year. Last day to submit bill requests to the Office of Legislative Counsel.
• January 31 Last day for each house to pass bills introduced in that house in the odd numbered year.
• February 16 Last day for bills to be introduced
• April 26 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to fiscal committees’ fiscal bills introduced in their house
• May 3 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to the Floor nonfiscal bills introduced in their house.
• May 10 Last day for policy committees to meet prior to May 28. • May 17 Last day for fiscal committees to hear and report to the Floor bills introduced in their house. Last day for fiscal committees to meet prior to May 28. • May 20-24 Floor session only. No committee may meet for any purpose except for Rules Committee, bills referred pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2, and Conference Committees.
• May 24 Last day for each house to pass bills introduced in that house. • May 28 Committee meetings may resume.
• June 15 Budget Bill must be passed by midnight.
• June 27 Last day for a legislative measure to qualify for the Nov. 5 General Election ballot.
• July 3 Last day for policy committees to meet and report bills. Summer Recess begins upon adjournment, provided Budget Bill has been passed. • August 5 Legislature reconvenes from Summer Recess.
• August 16 Last day for fiscal committees to meet and report bills. • August 19-31 Floor session only. No committee may meet for any purpose except Rules Committee, bills referred pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2, and Conference Committees.

Page 45 of 96 ends

Page 4 of 4 ends

• August 23 Last day to amend bills on the Floor.
• August 31 Last day for each house to pass bills. Final Recess begins upon adjournment.

As always, we will continue to keep you apprised as the Legislative Session continues. In the meantime, please feel free to contact our office with any questions or concerns you may have.

Page 46 of 96 ends

Item No. 2
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – STUDY SESSION
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
DATE: FEBRUARY 7, 2024
SUBJECT: FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION ON A COMMUNITY SURVEY

RECOMMENDATION
Review and consider a new Community Survey or Customer Satisfaction Survey.

BACKGROUND
The last community survey conducted by the Town was in 2013. Attached to this report is the Report prepared for the City Council in June 2013. While the focus of the survey was on the feasibility of renewing the parcel tax, the survey also addressed quality of life and service delivery questions.

In late 2023, the Chair of ADAPT reached out and asked if the Town would be interested in partnering on a community needs or satisfaction survey. I advised ADAPT that the Town conducted such in the past but not recently and that there were no current plans to do so.

A refresh of a quality of life/satisfaction survey would benefit the Town now that the Town Center is complete and service delivery focus has shifted to essential capital infrastructure and general services. If the Town were to move forward, I would recommend that the Council engage a professional survey consultant to assist (such as Godbe Research or EMC Research or others). It is likely that a full-scale customer satisfaction or services survey would exceed my budgetary authority and a formal Request for Proposal would need to be released. Approval of a vendor would need City Council authorization as a budget amendment for the current fiscal year or be included in the budget for the next fiscal year (2024/25). Even with the advances made in AI, I would estimate the cost to the Town of around $50k+ for a broad sweep survey.

ADAPT and emergency preparedness should/could certainly be a component of the survey. The Council could also consider including questions derived from interviewing the Town’s various committees.

If the Council is desirous of moving forward, I need direction from the Council on the following:

Page 47 of 96 ends

Community Survey
FEBRUARY 7, 2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

- Do you wish to conduct a community service survey?
- If so, do you wish to begin in the current fiscal year or plan it for the coming fiscal year? - Do you wish to engage the services of a survey professional? (recommended) - Do you wish for that professional to engage with members of Town Committees (perhaps a subcommittee from each) to include topics of interest in the survey? - Do you wish to form a subcommittee of the Council to work with staff on the project? The project would be staff led, but a subcommittee of the Council could assist with a review of the final questions and format of the survey prior to its release.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2013 Survey Report

Page 48 of 96 ends

Page 49 of 96 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 50 of 96 ends

Table of Contents
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T ABLE OF C ONTENTS
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii List of Figures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Motivation for Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Overview of Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Organization of Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Disclaimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 About True North . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Just the Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Quality of Life & Town Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Initial Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Programs & Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Positive Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Interim Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Negative Arguments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Final Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Quality of Life & Town Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Overall quality of life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Question 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Ways to Improve Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Overall Satisfaction with Town Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Question 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Initial Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Question 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Support by Subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Support with Renewal Clarification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Question 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Reasons for Opposing Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Question 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Programs & Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Question 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Spending Project Ratings by Subgroup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Positive Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Question 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Positive Arguments by Initial Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Interim Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Question 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Support by Subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Negative Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Question 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Negative Arguments by Initial Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Final Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Question 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Change in Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Background & Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Questionnaire Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Programming & Pre-Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Page 51 of 96 ends

Table of Contents
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 ii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sample, Recruiting & Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Statistical Margin of Error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Data Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Rounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Questionnaire & Toplines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Page 52 of 96 ends

List of Tables
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 iii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

L IST OF T ABLES
Table 1 Demographic Breakdown of Support at Initial Ballot Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Table 2 Top Programs & Projects by Position at Initial Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Table 3 Top Positive Arguments by Position at Initial Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Table 4 Demographic Breakdown of Support at Interim Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Table 5 Negative Arguments by Position at Initial Ballot Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Table 6 Demographic Breakdown of Support at Final Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Table 7 Movement Between Initial & Final Ballot Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Table 8 Demographics of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Page 53 of 96 ends

List of Figures
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

L IST OF F IGURES
Figure 1 Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Figure 2 Quality of Life by Years in Atherton, Parcel Size & Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Figure 3 Quality of Life by Age & Party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Figure 4 Changes to Improve Atherton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Figure 5 Overall Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 6 Overall Satisfaction by Years in Atherton, Parcel Size & Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 7 Overall Satisfaction by Age & Party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 8 Initial Ballot Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 9 Initial Ballot Test With Extension Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Figure 10 Reasons For Not Supporting Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Figure 11 Programs & Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figure 12 Positive Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Figure 13 Interim Ballot Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure 14 Negative Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 15 Final Ballot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 16 Maximum Margin of Error Due to Sampling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Page 54 of 96 ends

Introduction
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

I NTRODUCTION
Nestled between the San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean in San Mateo County, the Town of Atherton is a scenic and rural community home to an estimated 6,888 residents.1 Incorporated in 1923, the Town’s team of full-time and part-time employees provides a full suite of services to residents and local businesses either directly or through contract with other agencies.

Like many municipalities in California, Atherton relies on revenues from a supplemental tax (parcel tax) to fund essential municipal services including police, street maintenance, and infrastructure maintenance/improvements. Originally approved by voters several decades ago and periodically renewed by popular vote, in recent years the parcel tax has generated $1.86 million annually, which represents approximately 20% of the Town’s yearly budget. Unless renewed by Atherton voters, the parcel tax will expire in 2014.

MOTIVATION FOR RESEARCH The primary purpose of this study was to produce an unbiased, statistically reliable evaluation of voters’ interest in supporting a ballot measure that would extend the Town’s existing parcel tax without raising the tax rate. In addition to assessing the feasibility of such measure, the survey was designed to identify how to structure the measure so that it is consistent with the community’s priorities and expressed needs. Toward this end, the study was designed to:
• Measure current, baseline support for renewing the Town’s parcel tax • Identify the types of services and projects that voters are most interested in funding with parcel tax revenues
• Expose voters to arguments in favor of—and against—the proposed measure to gauge how information affects support for the parcel tax, and
• Estimate support for the measure once voters are presented with the types of information they will likely be exposed to during the election cycle.

It is important to note at the outset that voters’ opinions about ballot measures are often somewhat fluid, especially when the amount of information they initially have about a measure is limited. How voters think and feel about a measure today may not be the same way they think and feel once they have had a chance to hear more information about the measure during the election cycle. Accordingly, to accurately assess the feasibility of renewing the Town’s parcel tax, it was important that in addition to measuring current opinions about the measure (Question 5), the survey expose respondents to the types of information voters are likely to encounter during an election cycle—including arguments in favor (Question 9) and opposed (Question 11) to the measure—and gauge how this information ultimately impacts their voting decision (Questions 10 & 12).

OVERVIEW OF METHODOLOGY For a full discussion of the research methods and techniques used in this study, turn to Methodology on page 25. In brief, the survey used a combination of mailed invitations and phone calls to recruit participation in the survey from voters in the Town of Atherton who are likely to participate in the November 2014 election, with a subset who are also likely to participate in the lower-turnout November 2013 election. A total of 514 voters

1. Source: California Department of Finance Estimate, 2012.

Page 55 of 96 ends

Introduction
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 completed the survey by telephone or online at a secure, password protected survey website hosted by True North. The survey was administered between June 8 and June 19, 2013 and the average interview lasted 15 minutes.

ORGANIZATION OF REPORT This report is designed to meet the needs of readers who prefer a summary of the findings as well as those who are interested in the details of the results.

For those who seek an overview of the findings, the sections titled Just the Facts and Conclusions are for you. They provide a summary of the most important factual findings of the survey in bullet-point format and a discussion of their implications. For the interested reader, this section is followed by a more detailed question-by-question discussion of the results from the survey by topic area (see Table of Contents), as well as a description of the methodology employed for collecting and analyzing the data. And, for the truly ambitious reader, the questionnaire used for the interviews is contained at the back of this report and a complete set of crosstabulations for the survey results is contained in Appendix A.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS True North thanks the Town of Atherton for the opportunity to conduct the study, as well as the subcommittee's contributions to the design of the survey. Their collective expertise, insight, and local knowledge improved the overall quality of the research presented here.

DISCLAIMER The statements and conclusions in this report are those of the authors (Dr. Timothy McLarney and Richard Sarles) at True North Research, Inc. and not necessarily those of the Town of Atherton. Any errors and omissions are the responsibility of the authors.

ABOUT TRUE NORTH True North is a full-service survey research firm that is dedicated to providing public agencies with a clear understanding of the opinions, perceptions, priorities and concerns of their residents and voters. Through designing and implementing scientific surveys, focus groups and one-on-one interviews, as well as expert interpretation of the findings, True North helps its clients to move with confidence when making strategic decisions in a variety of areas—such as planning, policy evaluation, performance management, organizational development, establishing fiscal priorities, passing revenue measures, and developing effective public information campaigns.

During their careers, Dr. McLarney and Mr. Sarles have designed and conducted over 800 survey research studies for public agencies—including more than 300 studies for California municipalities and more than 300 revenue measure feasibility studies. Of the measures that have gone to ballot based on Dr. McLarney’s recommendation, more than 95% have been successful. In total, the research that Dr. McLarney has conducted has led to over $22 billion in successful local revenue measures.

Page 56 of 96 ends

Just the Facts
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

J UST THE F ACTS
The following section is an outline of the main factual findings from the survey. For the reader’s convenience, we have organized the findings according to the section titles used in the body of this report. Thus, if you would like to learn more about a particular finding, simply turn to the appropriate report section.

QUALITY OF LIFE & TOWN SERVICES
• Ninety-three percent (93%) of respondents shared favorable opinions of the quality of life in Atherton, with 60% reporting it is excellent and 33% stating it is good. An additional 5% of residents indicated that the quality of life in the town is fair, whereas 0% used poor or very poor to describe the quality of life in Atherton and 1% were unsure. • When asked what changes the Town government could make to improve the quality of life in Atherton, the most common response to this question was that no changes were needed or they could not think of a needed improvement (22%), followed by addressing traffic issues (14%), improving some aspect of government/leadership (12%), improving public safety (10%), and improving trails, sidewalks and/or bike paths in the community (6%). • More than eight-in-ten respondents (82%) indicated that they were satisfied with the Town’s efforts to provide municipal services, with 37% stating that they were very satisfied. Approximately 13% of voters reported that they were dissatisfied in this respect, whereas 4% were unsure or unwilling to state their opinion.

INITIAL BALLOT TEST
• With only the information provided in the ballot language, 75% of respondents indicated they would definitely or probably support the proposed parcel tax renewal measure at this stage in the survey, whereas 19% stated they would oppose the measure and 6% were unsure or unwilling to share their vote choice.
• After being informed that the existing parcel tax has been in place for several decades, has been periodically renewed by voters at cost of approximately $750 per year for the typical home, and the proposed measure would extend (but not increase) the parcel tax, aggregate support for the measure remained steady at 75%.
• Those who opposed the measure at this point in the survey were most likely to cite a concern about taxes already being too high, a perception that the Town needs to improve how it manages its budget and/or reduce spending, or a need for more information as the reasons for their position.

PROGRAMS & PROJECTS
• Among the projects and services that could be funded by the measure, voters most strongly favored funding the repair and maintenance of local streets and roads (93% strongly or somewhat favor), followed closely by quick responses to 9-1-1 emergencies (90%), the repair and improvement of storm drains and flood control (82%), and police and crime prevention services (81%).

Page 57 of 96 ends

Just the Facts
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

POSITIVE ARGUMENTS
When presented with arguments in favor of the measure, voters found the following arguments to be the most persuasive:
• All money raised by this measure will be spent locally to continue providing quality services in our community. It cannot be taken away by the State or be used for other purposes. • This measure will allow the Town to keep up with basic repairs and maintenance to streets and infrastructure. If we don't take care of it now, it will be a lot more expensive to repair in the future.
• The parcel tax has provided the Town with an important source of funding for several decades. Nearly 20% of the Town's total annual budget comes from the parcel tax.

INTERIM BALLOT TEST
• After being presented with services and capital improvements that could be funded as well as arguments in favor of the measure, support for the parcel tax renewal increased slightly to 77%, with 49% of voters indicating that they would definitely vote yes on the measure.

Approximately 19% of respondents opposed the measure at this point in the survey, and an additional 4% were unsure or unwilling to state their vote choice.

NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS
Of the arguments in opposition to the measure, voters found the following arguments to be the most persuasive:
• Now that the recession is over the economy is improving, the amount of money the Town receives from property taxes is increasing. We don't need to extend the parcel tax. • Government agencies need to live within their means, just like everyone else. We should not support this tax.
• The Town can't be trusted with this tax. They will mismanage the money.

FINAL BALLOT TEST
• After being presented with services that could be funded as well as arguments in favor and opposed to the measure, support for the parcel tax measure was found among 75% of voters, with 46% indicating that they would definitely support the measure. Approximately 20% of respondents were opposed to the measure at the Final Ballot Test, and 6% were unsure or unwilling to state their vote choice.

Page 58 of 96 ends

Conclusions
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

C ONCLUSIONS
The bulk of this report is devoted to conveying the details of the study findings. In this section, however, we attempt to ‘see the forest through the trees’ and note how the collective results of the survey answer the key questions that motivated the research. The following conclusions are based on True North’s interpretations of the survey results and the firm’s collective experience conducting revenue measure studies for public agencies throughout the State.

Should the Town of
Atherton proceed with
plans to place a parcel
tax renewal measure on
a future ballot?
Yes. Atherton voters have a high opinion of the quality of life in the town as well as the Town’s performance in providing municipal services.

These sentiments combine to create strong support for a measure to renew the existing parcel tax for a period of six years to fund police and crime prevention services, neighborhood public safety patrols, emergency preparedness, street repair and maintenance, and capital infrastructure improvements. The results of this feasibility study suggest that, if crafted appropriately and combined with an effective public education effort, the proposed parcel tax renewal measure has a very good chance of being supported by the necessary proportion of voters.

Having recommended that the Town move forward, it is important to note that this recommendation to take the next steps toward placing a measure on the ballot comes with several qualifications and conditions.

Indeed, although the results are promising, all parcel tax measures must overcome challenges prior to being successful. The proposed measure is no exception. The following paragraphs discuss some of the challenges and the next steps that True North recommends.

How does the election
date affect support for
the proposed measure?
Different election dates have different turnouts, different electorates, and—by extension—different opportunities and challenges. When compared to the November 2014 election, for example, the November 2013 and June 2014 election turnouts will be much lower and have a somewhat different demographic profile. In many communities, these demographic differences often translate into different levels of natural support for a proposed tax measure.

With respect to the proposed parcel tax renewal measure, however, Atherton voters are like-minded in their support for the renewal regardless of their voting propensity. Among the larger number of voters (3,577) expected to participate in the November 2014 election, 75% supported the parcel tax measure on the natural. The corresponding figure among high propensity voters (1,775) who are expected to participate in the lower-turnout November 2013 election was similar (78%).

Although it requires an aggressive schedule to prepare a ballot resolution and related materials, as well as conduct an effective community outreach effort, True North recommends that the Town pursue a November 2013 ballot election. This approach would also allow the Town a secPage 59 of 96 Conclusions
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ond election opportunity (June 2014) to renew the parcel tax if the measure should fail in November 2013 prior to the parcel tax expiring.

How might public education affect support for
the proposed measure?
As noted in the body of this report, individuals’ opinions about revenue measures are often not rigid, especially when the amount of information presented to the public on a measure has been limited. Thus, in addition to gauging current support for the measure, one of the goals of this study was to explore how the introduction of additional information about the measure may affect voters’ opinions about the parcel tax.

It is clear from the survey results that voters’ opinions about the proposed parcel tax measure are somewhat sensitive to the nature—and amount—of information that they have about the measure. Information about the specific services and capital improvements that could be funded by the parcel tax, as well as arguments in favor of the measure, were found by many voters to be compelling reasons to support the measure. Moreover, this information played an important role in preventing a significant erosion of support for the measure once respondents were exposed to the types of opposition arguments they will likely encounter during an election cycle.

Accordingly, one of the keys to building and sustaining support for the parcel tax measure will be the presence of an effective, well-organized public education effort that focuses on the need for the measure as well as the many benefits that it will bring. Indeed, although aggregate support for the parcel tax renewal exceeded the two-thirds level, it is important to recognize that less than half (47%) of voters indicated that they would definitely support the measure on the natural.

How might the economic or political climate alter support for the measure?
An important component of any ballot measure’s potential for success is the economic and political climate surrounding the election. Ongoing concerns about the housing market, unemployment, and lingering effects of the recession have combined to create an economic and political climate that is not as favorable to revenue measures as it was in prerecession years.

The results of this study and the conclusions noted above must be viewed in light of the current times. Indeed, support for the proposed parcel tax measure was strong despite the general economic malaise, which speaks volumes about the value that Atherton voters place on having high quality municipal services. Nevertheless, it is important to keep in mind that this poll is a snapshot in time. Should the economy and/or political climate continue to improve, support for the measure—and the potential effectiveness of a positive education campaign—could increase considerably. Conversely, negative economic and/or political developments, especially at the local level, could dampen support for the measure below what was recorded in this study.

Page 60 of 96 ends

Quality of Life & Town Services
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Q UALITY OF L IFE & T OWN S ERVICES
The opening series of questions in the survey were designed to profile voters’ opinions regarding the quality of life in Atherton, their ideas for changes the Town could implement to improve the quality of life in Atherton, as well as their assessment of the Town’s overall performance in providing municipal services.

OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE At the outset of the interview, respondents were asked to rate the overall quality of life in Atherton using a five-point scale of excellent, good, fair, poor, or very poor. As shown in Figure 1 below, 93% of respondents shared favorable opinions of the quality of life in Atherton, with 60% reporting it is excellent and 33% stating it is good. An additional 5% of residents indicated that the quality of life in the town is fair, whereas 0% used poor or very poor to describe the quality of life in Atherton and 1% were unsure.

Question 2 How would you rate the overall quality of life in Atherton? Would you say it is excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor? FIGURE 1 QUALITY OF LIFE
For the interested reader, Figures 2 and 3
present the responses to this question by
length of residence, parcel size, gender, age
and party identification. Although there were
some differences in the perceived quality of
life across subgroups, the most striking pattern in the figures is the relative consistency of positive opinions. Regardless of subgroup category, voters generally held very positive opinions regarding the quality of life in Atherton.

FIGURE 2 QUALITY OF LIFE BY YEARS IN ATHERTON, PARCEL SIZE & GENDER Fair

5.2 Very poor

0.0 Excellent

60.2 Good

33.2 Poor

0.0 Not sure

1.4 51.0

64.1 64.3

55.5 26.1

32.0 30.8

36.0 Excellent

62.8 52.2

63.4 60.9
Good

33.6 32.9 34.7

33.3 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Less than half
acre
Half acre or
more
Male Female
Years in Atherton (Q1) Parcel Size (QD3) Gender
% Respondents

Page 61 of 96 ends

Quality of Life & Town Services
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 FIGURE 3 QUALITY OF LIFE BY AGE & PARTY
WAYS TO IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE The next question in the opening series asked respondents to indicate one thing that the town government could change to make Atherton a better place to live, now and in the future. Question 3 was asked in an open-ended manner, which allowed respondents to mention any change that came to mind without be prompted by or restricted to a particular list of options. True North later reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown below in Figure 4.

Question 3 If the Town government could change one thing to make Atherton a better place to live now and in the future, what change would you like to see? FIGURE 4 CHANGES TO IMPROVE ATHERTON

66.2 60.1

50.7 27.4

32.3 44.6

63.4 64.4

57.5 Excellent

40.3 39.3 29.3 30.0
Good

48.2 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
18 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 or older Democrat Republican Other / DTS Age Party
% Respondents

1.0 1.0

1.1 1.2

1.5 1.5

1.5 1.6

1.7 1.8

2.1 2.4

2.5 2.7

2.7 3.0

3.1 3.1

3.8 4.2

5.3 5.3

10.2 11.9

14.4 21.6

2.1 1.8

6.4 0 5 10 15 20 25
Address barking dog complaints
Improve staff
Fewer restrictions on construction, permitting
Fewer legal conflicts with residents
Reduce taxes
Improve communication, outreach efforts
Develop new town center
Improve public transit
Improve permitting process
Improve schools, education
Improve quality, speed of public services
Improve parking
Bury power, telephone cables
Plant trees
Improve stormwater drainage
Improve streets, roads
Improve sense of community, neighborhoods
Add, improve libraries
Improve parks
Reduce noise pollution
Improve trash disposal services
Improve street lighting
Improve budgeting, spending
More restrictions, enforcement on
Improve trails, sidewalks, bike paths
Improve public safety
Improve government, leadership
Address traffic issues
No changes / Cannot think of anything
% Respondents

Page 62 of 96 ends

Quality of Life & Town Services
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 The most common response to this question was that no changes were needed or they could not think of a needed improvement (22%)—both of which are indicative of a respondent who does not perceive any pressing problems in the Town that should be addressed by local government.

Among the specific improvements that were cited, the most common were addressing traffic issues (14%), improving some aspect of government/leadership (12%), improving public safety (10%), and improving trails, sidewalks and/or bike paths in the community (6%).

OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH TOWN SERVICES The final question in this series asked respondents if, overall, they were satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the Town of Atherton is doing to provide municipal services. Because this question does not reference a specific program, facility, or service and requested that the respondent consider the Town’s performance in general, the findings of this question may be regarded as an overall performance rating for the Town.

Question 4 Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the Town of Atherton is doing to provide city services? FIGURE 5 OVERALL SATISFACTION
As shown in Figure 5, more than eight-in-ten
respondents (82%) indicated that they were
satisfied with the Town’s efforts to provide
municipal services, with 37% stating that they
were very satisfied. Approximately 13% of voters reported that they were dissatisfied in this respect, whereas 4% were unsure or unwilling
to state their opinion. At least 70% of Atherton residents in every identified subgroup indicated that they were satisfied with the
Town’s overall performance in providing
municipal services (see Figures 6 & 7).

FIGURE 6 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY YEARS IN ATHERTON, PARCEL SIZE & GENDER Very dissatisfied

4.7 Somewhat
satisfied

45.1 Very satisfied

37.1 Not sure

4.3 Somewhat
dissatisfied

8.7 39.5 37.0 35.1 39.5

31.3 46.7 48.2 41.4

36.9 31.7 35.7
Very
satisfied

47.6 42.8 52.0 45.6
Smwt
satisfied

36.6 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
Less than 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more Less than half
acre
Half acre or
more
Male Female
Years in Atherton (Q1) Parcel Size (QD3) Gender
% Respondents

Page 63 of 96 ends

Quality of Life & Town Services
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 FIGURE 7 OVERALL SATISFACTION BY AGE & PARTY

46.6 35.2

26.5 40.2

45.9 51.0
Very
satisfied

51.0 26.5 32.9 38.0
Smwt
satisfied

24.3 47.4

48.2 57.0
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
18 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 or older Democrat Republican Other / DTS Age Party
% Respondents

Page 64 of 96 ends

I NITIAL B ALLOT T EST
The primary research objective of this survey was to estimate voters’ support for a measure that would extend Atherton’s expiring parcel tax (at the current tax rate) to continue funding for police and crime prevention services, neighborhood public safety patrols, emergency preparedness, street repair and maintenance, and capital infrastructure improvements. To this end, Question 5 was designed to take an early assessment of voters’ support for the proposed measure.

The motivation for placing Question 5 up-front in the survey is twofold. First, voter support for a measure can often depend on the amount of information they have about a measure. At this point in the survey, the respondent has not been provided information about the proposed measure beyond what is presented in the ballot language. This situation is analogous to a voter casting a ballot with limited knowledge about the measure, such as what might occur in the absence of an effective education campaign. Question 5, also known as the Initial Ballot Test, is thus a good measure of voter support for the proposed measure as it is today. Because the Initial Ballot Test provides a gauge of ‘uninformed’ support for the measure, it also serves a second purpose in that it provides a useful baseline from which to judge the impact of various information items conveyed later in the survey on voter support for the measure.

Question 5 Later this year, voters in Atherton may be asked to vote on a local ballot measure.

Let me read you a summary of the measure. In order to continue funding for police and crime prevention services; neighborhood public safety patrols; emergency preparedness; street repair and maintenance; and capital infrastructure improvements shall the Town of Atherton extend its expiring parcel tax for six years without raising the tax rate and with all funds staying local? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? FIGURE 8 INITIAL BALLOT TEST
Figure 8 presents the results of the Initial
Ballot Test among all 514 respondents who
are likely to participate in the November
2014 election. Overall, 75% of respondents
indicated they would definitely or probably
support the measure at this stage in the survey, whereas 19% stated they would oppose the measure and 6% were unsure or unwilling to share their vote choice. The support levels recorded at the Initial Ballot Test were
approximately 8% greater than the twothirds supermajority required for passage of a parcel tax under California law.

SUPPORT BY SUBGROUPS Table 1 on the next page shows how support for the parcel tax renewal measure at the Initial Ballot Test varied by key demographic variables. The blue column (Approximate % of Voter Universe) indicates the percentage of the likely November 2014 electorate that each subgroup category comprises. As noted in the table, support for the proposed parcel tax renewal measure was widespread, exceeding a majority in every identified subgroup and exceeding two-thirds in most. Moreover, the levels of support among high propensity voters who Probably no

7.4 Not sure

5.4 Definitely yes

46.8 Probably yes

28.6 Definitely no

11.3 Refused

0.5

Page 65 of 96 ends

Initial Ballot Test
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 are likely to participate in the lower turnout November 2013 election were similar to those expressed by the larger universe of voters who are expected to participate in the higher turnout November 2014 election.

TABLE 1 DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN OF SUPPORT AT INITIAL BALLOT TEST SUPPORT WITH RENEWAL CLARIFICATION Naturally, many voters in the town may not be aware that the existing parcel tax has been in place for several decades and has been periodically renewed by voters at cost of approximately $750 per year for the typical home owner. The objective of Question 6 was to make respondents aware of this fact, as well as clarify that the proposed measure would extend the existing parcel tax for a period of six years without raising the rate.

With the aforementioned clarification, aggregate support for the measure remained stable at 75%, although the percentage of voters who indicated they would definitely support the measure increased by 3% to 50% (see Figure 9 on the next page). Opposition to the measure at this point in the survey was confined to approximately 19% of respondents, and an additional 7% stated that they were unsure or unwilling to share their vote choice.

Approximate %
of Voter
Universe
% Probably or
Definitely Yes % Not sure
Overall 100 75.4 5.4
Less than 5 10 78.9 4.0
5 to 9 14 68.3 9.1
10 to 14 12 77.1 5.1
15 or more 63 76.1 4.9
Less than half acre 13 74.2 2.2
Half acre or more 87 77.9 6.0
Male 53 75.6 3.9
Female 47 75.2 7.1
18 to 39 13 64.4 0.0
40 to 49 12 70.3 7.2
50 to 64 35 77.1 7.5
65 or older 40 78.6 5.1
2013 to 2009 21 69.0 2.9
2008 to 2005 10 51.3 8.0
2004 to 2001 9 90.0 1.3
2000 or before 61 79.4 6.4
Democrat 32 80.9 6.8
Republican 47 72.9 4.4
Other / DTS 21 72.3 5.7
Single dem 11 82.1 6.5
Dual dem 11 85.9 5.9
Single rep 12 70.0 4.7
Dual rep 21 75.1 5.9
Other 10 78.4 6.2
Mixed 35 70.9 4.6
Yes 86 74.8 5.4
No 14 79.2 5.8
Yes 71 75.0 5.0
No 29 76.3 6.6
Yes 50 78.0 5.5
No 50 72.8 5.3
Yes 79 75.0 4.8
No 21 76.8 7.8
Homeowner on Voter File
Likely to Vote by Mail
Likely November 2013
Voter
Likely June 2014 Voter
Age
Registration Year
Party
Household Party Type
Years in Atherton (Q1)
Parcel Size (QD3)
Gender

Page 66 of 96 ends

Initial Ballot Test
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Question 6 Voters approved a parcel tax for the Town of Atherton several decades ago and have periodically renewed the measure by popular vote. The parcel tax costs the typical home owner about $750 per year. The proposed measure I just described would NOT raise the parcel tax. It would only extend the current tax for six more years. Knowing this, would you vote yes or no on this measure?
FIGURE 9 INITIAL BALLOT TEST WITH EXTENSION INFORMATION REASONS FOR OPPOSING MEASURE Respondents who opposed the measure at Question 6 were subsequently asked if there was a particular reason for their position. Question 7 was asked in an open-ended manner, thereby allowing respondents to mention any reason that came to mind without being prompted by or restricted to a particular list of options. True North later reviewed the verbatim responses and grouped them into the categories shown in Figure 10.

The most frequently-mentioned reasons for opposing the parcel tax were a concern about taxes already being too high (27%), a perception that the Town needs to improve how it manages its budget and/or reduce spending (19%), and a need for more information (10%).

Question 7 Is there a particular reason why you do not support the measure I just described? FIGURE 10 REASONS FOR NOT SUPPORTING MEASURE
Refused

0.8 Definitely no

9.9 Probably yes

25.4 Definitely yes

50.0 Not sure

5.3 Probably no

8.6 0.6

2.2 2.8

6.2 8.6

8.8 10.1

14.0 19.1

27.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Too much money spent on lawyers, litigation
Do not trust government, leadership
Do not support details of measure
Not sure why additional funding is needed
Not sure / No particular reason
Town salaries, compensation, pensions too high
Need more information
Prefer not to answer
Town needs to improve budgeting, reduce spending
Taxes already too high
% Respondents Who Do Not Support Measure

Page 67 of 96 ends

P ROGRAMS & P ROJECTS
The ballot language presented in Question 5 indicated that the proposed parcel tax measure would be used to continue funding for police and crime prevention services, neighborhood public safety patrols, emergency preparedness, street repair and maintenance, and capital infrastructure improvements. The purpose of Question 8 was to provide respondents with the full range of programs and improvements that may be funded by the proposed measure, and to identify which of these improvements voters most favored funding with parcel tax proceeds.

After reading each item that may be funded by the measure, respondents were asked if they would favor or oppose spending some of the money on that particular item assuming that the measure passes. Truncated descriptions of the items tested, as well as voters’ responses, are shown in Figure 11 below.2
Question 8 The measure we've been discussing would continue funding for a variety of services and infrastructure projects in the Town. If the measure passes, would you favor or oppose continuing to use some of the money to: _____, or do you not have an opinion? FIGURE 11 PROGRAMS & PROJECTS
Overall, the item that resonated with the largest percentage of respondents was repairing and maintaining local streets and roads (93% strongly or somewhat favor), followed closely by maintaining quick responses to 9-1-1 emergencies (90%), repairing and improving storm drains and flood control (82%), and providing police and crime prevention services (81%). At the other end of the spectrum, voters were somewhat less enthused with the prospect of using parcel tax proceeds to improve code enforcement services (56%).

2. For the full text of the items tested, turn to Question 8 in Questionnaire & Toplines on page 28.

26.0 34.2

28.0 39.9

62.4 42.9

73.1 58.1

30.0 30.1

41.8 38.2

18.9 39.3

16.6 34.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Improve code enforcement
Provide neighborhood public safety patrols
Make capital infrastructure improvements
Ensure that the Town is prepared for emergencies
Provide police and crime prevention services
Repair and improve storm drains and flood control
Maintain quick responses to 9-1-1 emergencies
Repair and maintain local streets and roads
Q8h Q8b Q8e Q8c Q8a Q8g Q8f Q8d
% Respondents
Strongly favor Somewhat favor

Page 68 of 96 ends

Programs & Projects
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 SPENDING PROJECT RATINGS BY SUBGROUP Table 2 presents the top five projects (showing the percentage of respondents who strongly favor each) by position at the Initial Ballot Test. Not surprisingly, individuals who initially opposed the measure were generally less likely to favor spending money on a given project or service when compared with supporters and those who were initially undecided. Nevertheless, initial supporters, opponents, and the undecided did agree on all five of the top five priorities for funding.

TABLE 2 TOP PROGRAMS & PROJECTS BY POSITION AT INITIAL BALLOT TEST Position at
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5) Item Program or Project Summary
% Strongly
Favor
Q8f Maintain quick responses to 9-1-1 emergencies 82
Q8a Provide police and crime prevention services 74
Q8d Repair and maintain local streets and roads 68
Q8g Repair and improve storm drains and flood control 49 Q8c Ensure that the Town is prepared for emergencies 48 Q8f Maintain quick responses to 9-1-1 emergencies 37
Q8d Repair and maintain local streets and roads 25
Q8g Repair and improve storm drains and flood control 20 Q8a Provide police and crime prevention services 20
Q8c Ensure that the Town is prepared for emergencies 11 Q8f Maintain quick responses to 9-1-1 emergencies 79
Q8a Provide police and crime prevention services 58
Q8d Repair and maintain local streets and roads 45
Q8g Repair and improve storm drains and flood control 40 Q8c Ensure that the Town is prepared for emergencies 34 Probably or
Definitely Yes
(n = 388)
Probably or
Definitely No
(n = 96)
Not Sure
(n =28)

Page 69 of 96 ends

P OSITIVE A RGUMENTS
Ballot measures do not succeed or fail in a political vacuum. During an election cycle, proponents of a measure will present arguments to try to persuade voters to support a measure, just as opponents will present arguments to achieve the opposite goal. The objective of Question 9 was thus to present respondents with arguments in favor of the proposed measure and identify whether they felt the arguments were convincing reasons to support it. Arguments in opposition to the measure were also presented and will be discussed later in this report (see Negative Arguments on page 20). Within each series, specific arguments were administered in random order to avoid a systematic position bias.

Question 9 Supporters of the measure may say: _____. Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to SUPPORT the measure? FIGURE 12 POSITIVE ARGUMENTS
Figure 12 above presents the truncated positive arguments tested, as well as voters’ reactions to the arguments. The arguments are ranked from most convincing to least convincing based on the percentage of respondents who indicated that the argument was either a ‘very convincing’ or ‘somewhat convincing’ reason to support the measure. Using this methodology, the most compelling positive argument was: All money raised by this measure will be spent locally to continue providing quality services in our community. It cannot be taken away by the State or be used for other purposes (78%), This measure will allow the Town to keep up with basic repairs and maintenance to streets and infrastructure. If we don't take care of it now, it will be a lot more expensive to repair in the future (74%), and The parcel tax has provided the Town with an important source of funding for several decades. Nearly 20% of the Town's total annual budget comes from the parcel tax (73%).

POSITIVE ARGUMENTS BY INITIAL SUPPORT Table 3 lists the top five most convincing positive arguments (showing the percentage of respondents who cited it as very convincing) according to respondents’ vote choice at the Initial Ballot Test. The most striking pattern in the table is that the positive arguments resonated with a much higher percentage of voters who were initially inclined to support the measure when compared with voters who initially opposed the

37.7 49.6

39.5 41.8

39.1 49.8

28.4 20.6

31.8 31.4

35.1 28.6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
The parcel tax is 100% tax deductible for home owners
Parcel tax expiration means cuts to police, public safety, street maintenance Measure will help protect our quality of life, our property values Nearly 20% of the Town’s total annual budget comes from parcel tax Maintenance now is less expensive than future repairs
All money raised by this measure will be spent locally
Q9f Q9e Q9b Q9d Q9c Q9a
% Respondents
Very convincing Somewhat convincing

Page 70 of 96 ends

Positive Arguments
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 measure or were unsure. Nevertheless, three arguments were ranked among the top five most compelling by all three groups.

TABLE 3 TOP POSITIVE ARGUMENTS BY POSITION AT INITIAL BALLOT TEST Position at
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5) Item Positive Argument Summary
% Very
Convincing
Q9e Parcel tax expiration means cuts to police, public safety, street maintenance 62 Q9a All money raised by this measure will be spent locally 62 Q9d Nearly 20% of the Town’s total annual budget comes from parcel tax 52 Q9c Maintenance now is less expensive than future repairs 49 Q9b Measure will help protect our quality of life, our property values 49 Q9f The parcel tax is 100% tax deductible for home owners 14 Q9a All money raised by this measure will be spent locally 8 Q9e Parcel tax expiration means cuts to police, public safety, street maintenance 7 Q9b Measure will help protect our quality of life, our property values 6 Q9c Maintenance now is less expensive than future repairs 6 Q9d Nearly 20% of the Town’s total annual budget comes from parcel tax 36 Q9a All money raised by this measure will be spent locally 32 Q9b Measure will help protect our quality of life, our property values 32 Q9e Parcel tax expiration means cuts to police, public safety, street maintenance 28 Q9f The parcel tax is 100% tax deductible for home owners 28 Probably or
Definitely Yes
(n = 388)
Probably or
Definitely No
(n = 96)
Not Sure
(n =28)

Page 71 of 96 ends

I NTERIM B ALLOT T EST
After exposing respondents to the types of positive arguments they may encounter during an election cycle, the survey again presented voters with the ballot language used previously to gauge how their support for the proposed parcel tax measure may have changed. As shown in Figure 13, overall support for the measure among voters increased slightly to 77%, with 49% of voters indicating that they would definitely vote yes on the measure. Approximately 19% of respondents opposed the measure at this point in the survey, and an additional 4% were unsure or unwilling to state their vote choice.

Question 10 Sometimes people change their mind about a measure once they have more information about it. Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a summary of it again. In order to continue funding for police and crime prevention services; neighborhood public safety patrols; emergency preparedness; street repair and maintenance; and capital infrastructure improvements shall the Town of Atherton extend its expiring parcel tax for six years without raising the tax rate and with all funds staying local? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?
FIGURE 13 INTERIM BALLOT TEST
SUPPORT BY SUBGROUPS Table 4 on the next page shows how support for the measure at this point in the survey varied by key voter subgroups, as well as the percentage change in subgroup support when compared with the Initial Ballot Test. Positive differences appear in green, whereas negative differences appear in red. As shown in the table, support for the parcel tax generally changed by small amounts (+/- 4% or less) for most subgroups between the Initial and Interim Ballot Test. The largest net gains in support were found among those who had lived in Atherton between five and nine years, individuals who registered to vote in Atherton between 2005 and 2008, and voters under the age of 40.

Probably no

8.9 Not sure

3.3 Definitely yes

49.4 Probably yes

27.1 Definitely no

10.2 Refused

1.0

Page 72 of 96 ends

Interim Ballot Test
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 TABLE 4 DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN OF SUPPORT AT INTERIM BALLOT TEST Approximate %
of Voter
Universe
% Probably or
Definitely Yes
Change From
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5)
Overall 100 76.5 +1.1
Less than 5 10 82.8 +3.9
5 to 9 14 75.1 +6.8
10 to 14 12 81.9 +4.8
15 or more 63 74.8 -1.3
Less than half acre 13 74.2 +0.0
Half acre or more 87 79.7 +1.8
Male 53 77.0 +1.4
Female 47 75.9 +0.8
18 to 39 13 69.5 +5.0
40 to 49 12 74.3 +4.0
50 to 64 35 77.4 +0.3
65 or older 40 78.3 -0.3
2013 to 2009 21 72.2 +3.3
2008 to 2005 10 60.2 +8.9
2004 to 2001 9 87.3 -2.7
2000 or before 61 79.1 -0.4
Democrat 32 81.4 +0.5
Republican 47 73.7 +0.8
Other / DTS 21 75.1 +2.8
Single dem 11 77.9 -4.2
Dual dem 11 90.0 +4.1
Single rep 12 69.8 -0.2
Dual rep 21 76.4 +1.3
Other 10 80.3 +2.0
Mixed 35 72.8 +2.0
Yes 86 76.1 +1.4
No 14 78.8 -0.4
Yes 71 76.1 +1.1
No 29 77.4 +1.1
Yes 50 77.7 -0.4
No 50 75.4 +2.6
Yes 79 75.6 +0.6
No 21 79.9 +3.1
Years in Atherton (Q1)
Parcel Size (QD3)
Gender
Age
Registration Year
Party
Household Party Type
Homeowner on Voter File
Likely to Vote by Mail
Likely November 2013
Voter
Likely June 2014 Voter

Page 73 of 96 ends

N EGATIVE A RGUMENTS
Whereas Question 9 presented respondents with arguments in favor of the measure, Question 11 presented respondents with arguments designed to elicit opposition to the measure. In the case of Question 11, however, respondents were asked whether they felt that the argument was a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to oppose the measure.

The arguments tested, as well as voters’ opinions about the arguments, are presented in Figure

14. Question 11 Opponents of the measure may say: _____. Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to OPPOSE the measure? FIGURE 14 NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS
Among the negative arguments tested, the most compelling were: Now that the recession is over the economy is improving, the amount of money the Town receives from property taxes is increasing. We don't need to extend the parcel tax (55%), Government agencies need to live within their means, just like everyone else. We should not support this tax (50%), and The Town can't be trusted with this tax. They will mismanage the money (43%).

NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS BY INITIAL SUPPORT Table 5 ranks the negative arguments (showing the percentage of respondents who cited each as very convincing) according to respondents’ vote choice at the Initial Ballot Test.

TABLE 5 NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS BY POSITION AT INITIAL BALLOT TEST

10.6 13.6

20.2 17.4

16.4 29.8

29.7 37.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
With no senior exemption, measure is unfair to seniors
Town can’t be trusted with this tax
Government agencies need to live within their means like everyone Economy improving, Town receiving more money from property taxes Q11d Q11c Q11b Q11a
% Respondents
Very convincing Somewhat convincing
Position at
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5) Item Negative Argument Summary
% Very
Convincing
Q11a Economy improving, Town receiving more money from property taxes 11 Q11b Government agencies need to live within their means like everyone 9 Q11d With no senior exemption, measure is unfair to seniors 7 Q11c Town can’t be trusted with this tax 5
Q11b Government agencies need to live within their means like everyone 67 Q11c Town can’t be trusted with this tax 46
Q11a Economy improving, Town receiving more money from property taxes 45 Q11d With no senior exemption, measure is unfair to seniors 26 Q11b Government agencies need to live within their means like everyone 20 Q11a Economy improving, Town receiving more money from property taxes 18 Q11c Town can’t be trusted with this tax 16
Q11d With no senior exemption, measure is unfair to seniors 6 Probably or
Definitely Yes
(n = 388)
Probably or
Definitely No
(n = 96)
Not Sure
(n =28)

Page 74 of 96 ends

F INAL B ALLOT T EST
Voters’ opinions about ballot measures are often not rigid, especially when the amount of information presented to the public on a measure has been limited. An important goal of the survey was thus to gauge how voters’ opinions about the proposed measure may be affected by the information they could encounter during the course of an election cycle. After providing respondents with the wording of the proposed measure, services that could be funded by the measure, as well as arguments in favor and against the proposal, respondents were again asked whether they would vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the proposed parcel tax renewal measure.

Question 12 Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a summary of it one more time. In order to continue funding for police and crime prevention services; neighborhood public safety patrols; emergency preparedness; street repair and maintenance; and capital infrastructure improvements shall the Town of Atherton extend its expiring parcel tax for six years without raising the tax rate and with all funds staying local? If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?
FIGURE 15 FINAL BALLOT TEST
At this point in the survey, support for the parcel tax measure was found among 75% of voters, with 46% indicating that they would definitely support the measure. Approximately 20% of respondents were opposed to the measure at the Final Ballot Test, and 6% were unsure or unwilling to state their vote choice.

Probably no

9.1 Not sure

4.7 Definitely yes

46.4 Probably yes

28.1 Definitely no

10.5 Refused

1.2

Page 75 of 96 ends

C HANGE IN S UPPORT
Table 6 provides a closer look at how support for the proposed parcel tax measure changed over the course of the interview by calculating the difference in support between the Initial, Interim, and Final Ballot Tests within various subgroups of voters. The percentage of support for the measure at the Final Ballot Test is shown in the column with the heading % Probably or Definitely Yes. The columns to the right show the difference between the Final and the Initial, and the Final and Interim Ballot Tests. Positive differences appear in green, whereas negative differences appear in red.

TABLE 6 DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN OF SUPPORT AT FINAL BALLOT TEST As expected, voters generally responded to the negative arguments with a reduction in their support for the parcel tax measure when compared with the levels recorded at the Interim Ballot Test. The general trend over the course of the entire survey (Initial to Final Ballot Test), however, was mixed—with moderate decreases (-5% or less) in some groups being offset by modest increases in others.

Approximate %
of Voter
Universe
% Probably or
Definitely Yes
Change From
Initial Ballot
Test (Q5)
Change From
Interim Ballot
Test (Q10)
Overall 100 74.6 -0.8 -1.9
Less than 5 10 81.1 +2.1 -1.7
5 to 9 14 76.2 +7.9 +1.1
10 to 14 12 80.3 +3.2 -1.6
15 or more 63 72.0 -4.0 -2.7
Less than half acre 13 73.3 -1.0 -1.0
Half acre or more 87 77.4 -0.5 -2.3
Male 53 76.0 +0.4 -1.0
Female 47 72.9 -2.2 -3.0
18 to 39 13 60.5 -4.0 -9.0
40 to 49 12 72.6 +2.3 -1.7
50 to 64 35 77.3 +0.2 -0.1
65 or older 40 76.9 -1.7 -1.4
2013 to 2009 21 64.2 -4.7 -8.0
2008 to 2005 10 61.7 +10.4 +1.5
2004 to 2001 9 87.3 -2.7 No change
2000 or before 61 78.3 -1.1 -0.8
Democrat 32 81.7 +0.8 +0.3
Republican 47 72.8 -0.1 -0.9
Other / DTS 21 67.2 -5.1 -7.9
Single dem 11 76.4 -5.7 -1.5
Dual dem 11 91.5 +5.5 +1.5
Single rep 12 68.6 -1.4 -1.2
Dual rep 21 75.1 -0.0 -1.3
Other 10 80.3 +2.0 -0.0
Mixed 35 68.4 -2.5 -4.4
Yes 86 73.9 -0.9 -2.2
No 14 78.7 -0.4 -0.1
Yes 71 75.5 +0.5 -0.6
No 29 72.2 -4.1 -5.2
Yes 50 77.1 -1.0 -0.6
No 50 72.1 -0.7 -3.3
Yes 79 73.7 -1.3 -1.9
No 21 77.7 +0.9 -2.2
Likely to Vote by Mail
Likely November 2013
Voter
Likely June 2014 Voter
Registration Year
Party
Household Party Type
Homeowner on Voter File
Years in Atherton (Q1)
Parcel Size (QD3)
Gender
Age

Page 76 of 96 ends

Change in Support
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Whereas Table 6 displays change in support for the measure over the course of the interview at the group level, Table 7 displays the individual-level changes that occurred between the Initial and Final Ballot Tests for the measure. On the left side of the table is shown each of the response options to the Initial Ballot Test and the percentage of respondents in each group. The cells in the body of the table depict movement within each response group (row) based on the information provided throughout the course of the survey as recorded by the Final Ballot Test. For example, in the first row we see that of the 46.8% of respondents who indicated that they would definitely support the measure at the Initial Ballot Test, 41.0% also indicated that they would definitely support the measure at the Final Ballot Test. Approximately 4.7% moved to the probably support group, 0.3% moved to the probably oppose group, 0.0% moved to the definitely oppose group, and 0.9% percent stated they were now unsure of their vote choice.

To ease interpretation of the table, the cells are color coded. Red shaded cells indicate declining support, green shaded cells indicate increasing support, whereas white cells indicate no movement. Moreover, within the cells, a white font indicates a fundamental change in the vote: from yes to no, no to yes, or not sure to either yes or no.

TABLE 7 MOVEMENT BETWEEN INITIAL & FINAL BALLOT TESTS
As one might expect, the information conveyed in the survey had the greatest impact on individuals who either weren’t sure about how they would vote at the Initial Ballot Test or were tentative in their vote choice (probably yes or probably no). Moreover, Table 7 makes clear that although the information did impact some voters, it did not do so in a consistent way for all respondents.

Some respondents found the information conveyed during the course of the interview to be a reason to become more supportive of the measure, whereas a similar percentage found the same information to be a reason to be less supportive. Despite 10% of respondents making a fundamental3 shift in their opinion about the measure over the course of the interview, the net impact is that support for the measure at the Final Ballot Test was just 1% lower than support at the Initial Ballot Test.

3. This is, they changed from a position of support, opposition or undecided at the Initial Ballot Test to a different position at the Final Ballot Test.

Definitely
support
Probably
support
Probably
oppose
Definitely
oppose Not sure
Definitely support 46.8% 41.0% 4.7% 0.3% 0.0% 0.9%
Probably support 28.6% 4.6% 20.5% 0.7% 0.8% 2.0%
Probably oppose 7.4% 0.1% 1.2% 5.3% 0.5% 0.3%
Definitely oppose 11.3% 0.0% 0.4% 2.0% 8.9% 0.0%
Not sure 5.9% 0.7% 1.3% 0.9% 0.2% 2.2%
Initial Ballot Test (Q5)
Final Ballot Test (Q12)

Page 77 of 96 ends

B ACKGROUND & D EMOGRAPHICS
TABLE 8 DEMOGRAPHICS OF SAMPLE
In addition to questions directly related to the proposed measure, the study collected basic demographic information about respondents and their households. Some of this information was gathered
during the interview, although much of it was collected from the voter file. The profile of the likely November 2014 voter sample used for this study is
shown in Table 8.

Total Respondents 514
Years in Atherton (Q1)
Less than 5 10.2
5 to 9 14.1
10 to 14 12.4
15 or more 63.3
Parcel Size (QD3)
Less than half acre 12.5
Half acre or more 80.8
Refused 6.7
Gender
Male 53.3
Female 46.7
Age
18 to 39 13.0
40 to 49 11.7
50 to 64 34.1
65 or older 38.9
Not on file 2.3
Registration Year
2013 to 2009 20.5
2008 to 2005 10.1
2004 to 2001 8.7
2000 or before 60.6
Not on file 0.2
Party
Democrat 32.1
Republican 47.0
Other / DTS 20.7
Not on file 0.2
Household Party Type
Single dem 11.2
Dual dem 11.4
Single rep 11.9
Dual rep 20.8
Other 10.0
Mixed 34.7
Not on file 0.2
Homeowner on Voter File
Yes 86.1
No 13.9
Likely to Vote by Mail
Yes 71.0
No 29.0
Likely November 2013 Voter
Yes 49.6
No 50.4
Likely June 2014 Voter
Yes 78.7
No 21.3

Page 78 of 96 ends

M ETHODOLOGY
The following sections outline the methodology used in the study, as well as the motivation for using certain techniques.

QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT Dr. McLarney of True North Research worked closely with the Town of Atherton’s subcommittee to develop a questionnaire that covered the topics of interest and avoided possible sources of systematic measurement error, including position-order effects, wording effects, response-category effects, scaling effects, and priming. Several questions included multiple individual items. Because asking the items in a set order can lead to a systematic position bias in responses, items were asked in random order for each respondent.

Some of the questions asked in this study were presented only to a subset of respondents. For example, only individuals who did not support the parcel tax extension at Question 6 were asked the follow-up open-ended Question 7 regarding their reasons for not supporting the measure.

The questionnaire included with this report (see Questionnaire & Toplines on page 28) identifies the skip patterns that were used during the interview to ensure that each respondent received the appropriate questions.

PROGRAMMING & PRE-TEST Prior to fielding the survey, the questionnaire was CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing) programmed to assist interviewers when conducting the telephone interviews, as well as web programmed to allow online participation. Both programs automatically navigate skip patterns, randomize the appropriate question items, and alert the interviewer (phone) or participant (web) to certain types of keypunching mistakes should they occur. The integrity of the questionnaire was pre-tested internally by True North prior to formally commencing the interviewing.

SAMPLE, RECRUITING & DATA COLLECTION The survey was administered to registered voters in the Town of Atherton who are likely to participate in the November 2014 election, with a subset of voters who are also likely to participate in the lower turnout November 2013 election and/or June 2014 primary election. A total of 3,434 voters were mailed letters that invited them to participate in the study either online at a secure website or by telephone. Each voter was assigned a unique personal identification number (PIN), which prevented outsiders from participating in the survey and ensured that voters completed the survey only once. A total of 514 voters participated in the survey online or by telephone between June 8 to June 19, 2013.

The telephone interviews averaged 15 minutes in length.

STATISTICAL MARGIN OF ERROR The final sample of voters was representative of the age, gender, and partisanship of voters in the Town of Atherton who are likely to participate in the November 2014 election. The results of the sample can thus be used to estimate the opinions of all voters likely to participate in the November 2014 election. Because not all voters participated in the study, however, the results have what is known as a statistical margin of error due to sampling. The margin of error refers to the difference between what was found in the survey of 514 voters for a particular question and what would have been found if all 3,577 likely November 2014 voters identified in the Town had been surveyed for the study.

Page 79 of 96 ends

Methodology
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 For example, in estimating the percentage of likely voters that would definitely support the measure at the Initial Ballot Test (Question 5 in the survey), the margin of error can be calculated if one knows the size of the population, the size of the sample, a confidence level, and the distribution of responses to the question. The appropriate equation for estimating the margin of error, in this case, is shown below.

Where is the proportion of voters who said definitely yes (0.47 for 47% in this example), is the population size of likely voters (3,577), is the sample size that received the question (514) and is the upper point for the t-distribution with degrees of freedom (1.96 for a 95% confidence interval). Solving the equation using these values reveals a margin of error of ± 4.00%. This means that with 47% of survey respondents indicating they would definitely support the measure at the Initial Ballot Test, we can be 95% confident that the actual percentage of all likely November 2014 voters that would definitely support the measure is between 43% and 51%.

Figure 16 provides a graphic plot of the maximum margin of error in this study. The maximum margin of error for a dichotomous percentage result occurs when the answers are evenly split such that 50% provide one response and 50% provide the alternative response. For this survey, the maximum margin of error is ± 4.00%.

FIGURE 16 MAXIMUM MARGIN OF ERROR DUE TO SAMPLING
Within this report, figures and tables show how responses to certain questions varied by subgroups such as age, gender, and partisan affiliation. Figure 16 is thus useful for understanding how the maximum margin of error for a percentage estimate will grow as the number of individuals asked a question (or in a particular subgroup) shrinks. Because the margin of error grows pˆ t Nn –
N------------   pˆ 1 – pˆ n – 1  ------------------- pˆ N
n
t   2 n – 1
514 Likely Nov
2014 Voters
± 4.00%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Sample Size (Number of Respondents)
Margin of Error

Page 80 of 96 ends

Methodology
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 exponentially as the sample size decreases, the reader should use caution when generalizing and interpreting the results for small subgroups.

DATA COLLECTION Interviews were conducted online and also during weekday evenings (5:30PM to 9PM) and on weekends (10AM to 5PM) by telephone between June 8 to June 19, 2013.

It is standard practice not to call during the day on weekdays because most working adults are unavailable and thus calling during those hours would bias the sample. The phone interviews averaged 15 minutes in length.

DATA PROCESSING Data processing consisted of checking the data for errors or inconsistencies, coding and recoding responses, and preparing frequency analyses and crosstabulations.

ROUNDING Numbers that end in 0.5 or higher are rounded up to the nearest whole number, whereas numbers that end in 0.4 or lower are rounded down to the nearest whole number.

These same rounding rules are also applied, when needed, to arrive at numbers that include a decimal place in constructing figures and charts. Occasionally, these rounding rules lead to small discrepancies in the first decimal place when comparing tables and pie charts for a given question.

Page 81 of 96 ends

Q UESTIONNAIRE & T OPLINES

True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 1
Town of Atherton
Parcel Tax Survey
Final Toplines
June 2013
Section 1: Introduction to Study
Hi, may I please speak to _____. My name is _____, and Im calling on behalf of TNR, an independent public opinion research firm. Were conducting a survey of voters about important issues in Atherton and Id like to get your opinions.

If needed: This is a survey about important issues in your communityIm NOT trying to sell anything and I wont ask for a donation.

If needed: The survey should take about 10 minutes to complete.

If needed: If now is not a convenient time, can you let me know a better time so I can call back?
If the person asks why you need to speak to the listed person or if they ask to participate instead, explain: For statistical purposes, at this time the survey must only be completed by this particular individual.

If the person says they are an elected official or is somehow associated with the survey, politely explain that this survey is designed to measure the opinions of those not closely associated with the study, thank them for their time, and terminate the interview.

Section 2: Quality of Life & Overall Services
Id like to begin by asking you a few questions about what it is like to live in the Town of Atherton.

Q1 How long have you lived in the Town of Atherton?
1 Less than 1 year 1%
2 1 to 2 years 4%
3 3 to 4 years 5%
4 5 to 9 years 14%
5 10 to 14 years 12%
6 15 years or longer 63%
99 Refused 0%
Q2 How would you rate the overall quality of life in Atherton? Would you say it is excellent, good, fair, poor or very poor?
1 Excellent 60%
2 Good 33%
3 Fair 5%
4 Poor 0%
5 Very Poor 0%
98 Not sure 1%
99 Refused 0%

Page 82 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 2
Q3
If the Town government could change one thing to make Atherton a better place to live now and in the future, what change would you like to see? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below.

No changes / Cannot think of anything 22%
Address traffic issues 14%
Improve government, leadership 12%
Improve public safety 10%
Improve trails, sidewalks, bike paths 6%
Improve budgeting, spending 5%
More restrictions, enforcement on
construction, permitting 5%
Improve trash disposal services 4%
Improve street lighting 4%
Improve streets, roads 3%
Add, improve libraries 3%
Reduce noise pollution 3%
Improve parks 3%
Improve sense of community, neighborhoods 3%
Develop new town center 2%
Improve communication, outreach efforts 2%
Improve parking 2%
Bury power, telephone cables 2%
Plant trees 2%
Improve permitting process 2%
Improve stormwater drainage 2%
Reduce taxes 2%
Improve schools, education 2%
Improve public transit 2%
Improve quality, speed of public services 2%
Fewer legal conflicts with residents 1%
Fewer restrictions on construction, permitting 1%
Address barking dog complaints 1%
Attract new businesses 1%
Implement, restructure local taxes 1%
Improve staff 1%
Improve public facilities 1%

Page 83 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 3
Q4
Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the Town of Atherton is doing to provide city services? Get answer, then ask: Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? 1 Very satisfied 37%
2 Somewhat satisfied 45%
3 Somewhat dissatisfied 9%
4 Very dissatisfied 5%
98 Not sure 3%
99 Refused 1%
Section 3: Initial Ballot Test
Later this year, voters in Atherton may be asked to vote on a local ballot measure. Let me read you a summary of the measure.

Q5
In order to continue funding for:

U Police and crime prevention services
U Neighborhood public safety patrols
U Emergency preparedness
U Street repair and maintenance
U And capital infrastructure improvements
Shall the Town of Atherton extend its expiring parcel tax for six years without raising the tax rate and with all funds staying local?
If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? 1 Definitely yes 47%
2 Probably yes 29%
3 Probably no 7%
4 Definitely no 11%
98 Not sure 5%
99 Refused 1%

Page 84 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 4
Q6
Voters approved a parcel tax for the Town of Atherton several decades ago and have periodically renewed the measure by popular vote. The parcel tax costs the typical home owner about $750 per year.

The proposed measure I just described would NOT raise the parcel tax. It would only extend the current tax for six more years.

Knowing this, would you vote yes or no on this measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)?
1 Definitely yes 50% Skip to Q8
2 Probably yes 25% Skip to Q8
3 Probably no 9% Ask Q7
4 Definitely no 10% Ask Q7
98 Not sure 5% Ask Q7
99 Refused 1% Skip to Q8
Q7 Is there a particular reason why you do not support the measure I just described? Verbatim responses recorded and later grouped into categories shown below.

Taxes already too high 27%
Town needs to improve budgeting, reduce
spending 19%
Prefer not to answer 14%
Need more information 10%
Town salaries, compensation, pensions too
high 9%
Not sure / No particular reason 9%
Not sure why additional funding is needed 6%
Do not support details of measure 3%
Do not trust government, leadership 2%
Too much money spent on lawyers, litigation 1%
Section 4: Programs & Projects
Q8
The measure weve been discussing would continue funding for a variety of services and infrastructure projects in the Town.

If the measure passes, would you favor or oppose continuing to use some of the money to: _____, or do you not have an opinion? Get answer, if favor or oppose, then ask: Would that be strongly (favor/oppose) or somewhat (favor/oppose)? Randomize
Strongly
Favor
Somewhat
Favor
Somewhat
Oppose
Strongly
Oppose
No Opinion
Refused
A Provide police and crime prevention services 62% 19% 9% 4% 5% 1% B Provide neighborhood public safety patrols 34% 30% 14% 6% 14% 2%

Page 85 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 5
C Ensure that the Town is adequately prepared
for emergencies 40% 38% 11% 3% 6% 2%
D Repair and maintain local streets and roads 58% 34% 3% 1% 2% 1% E Make capital infrastructure improvements 28% 42% 12% 6% 10% 3% F Maintain quick responses to 9-1-1
emergencies 73% 17% 5% 2% 3% 1%
G Repair and improve storm drains and flood
control 43% 39% 8% 2% 7% 2%
H Improve code enforcement 26% 30% 20% 9% 13% 2%
Section 5: Positive Arguments
What Id like to do now is tell you what some people may say about the measure weve been discussing.

Q9 Supporters of the measure may say: _____. Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to SUPPORT the measure? Randomize
Very
Convincing
Somewhat
Convincing
Not At All
Convincing
Dont Believe
Dont
Know/No
Opinion
Refused
A
All money raised by this measure will be
spent locally to continue providing quality
services in our community. It cannot be taken
away by the State or be used for other
purposes.
50% 29% 14% 3% 3% 3%
B
By keeping our Town safe, clean and wellmaintained, this measure will help protect our quality of life and our property values.
40% 32% 16% 8% 2% 2%
C
This measure will allow the Town to keep up
with basic repairs and maintenance to streets
and infrastructure. If we dont take care of it
now, it will be a lot more expensive to repair
in the future.
39% 35% 16% 3% 3% 3%
D
The parcel tax has provided the Town with an
important source of funding for several
decades. Nearly 20% of the Towns total
annual budget comes from the parcel tax.
42% 31% 15% 4% 5% 3%
E
If the parcel tax is allowed to expire, it will
mean cuts to important services including
police, public safety and street maintenance.
50% 21% 15% 8% 4% 3%
F The parcel tax is 100% tax deductible for
home owners. 38% 28% 19% 6% 6% 2%

Page 86 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 6
Section 6: Interim Ballot Test
Sometimes people change their mind about a measure once they have more information about it. Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a summary of it again.

Q10
In order to continue funding for:

U Police and crime prevention services
U Neighborhood public safety patrols
U Emergency preparedness
U Street repair and maintenance
U And capital infrastructure improvements
Shall the Town of Atherton extend its expiring parcel tax for six years without raising the tax rate and with all funds staying local?
If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? 1 Definitely yes 49%
2 Probably yes 27%
3 Probably no 9%
4 Definitely no 10%
98 Not sure 3%
99 Refused 1%
Section 7: Negative Arguments
Next, let me tell you what opponents of the measure may say.

Q11 Opponents of the measure may say: _____. Do you think this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not at all convincing reason to OPPOSE the measure? Randomize
Very
Convincing
Somewhat
Convincing
Not At All
Convincing
Dont Believe
Dont
Know/No
Opinion
Refused
A
Now that the recession is over the economy is
improving, the amount of money the Town
receives from property taxes is increasing. We
dont need to extend the parcel tax.
17% 37% 28% 12% 4% 2%
B
Government agencies need to live within their
means, just like everyone else. We should not
support this tax.
20% 29% 38% 8% 2% 2%
C The Town cant be trusted with this tax. They
will mismanage the money. 14% 30% 31% 19% 5% 2%
D This measure is unfair to seniors. There is no
senior exemption. 11% 16% 51% 14% 6% 2%

Page 87 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 7
Section 8: Final Ballot Test
Now that you have heard a bit more about the measure, let me read you a summary of it one more time.

Q12
In order to continue funding for:

U Police and crime prevention services
U Neighborhood public safety patrols
U Emergency preparedness
U Street repair and maintenance
U And capital infrastructure improvements
Shall the Town of Atherton extend its expiring parcel tax for six years without raising the tax rate and with all funds staying local?
If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? Get answer, then ask: Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? 1 Definitely yes 46%
2 Probably yes 28%
3 Probably no 9%
4 Definitely no 10%
98 Not sure 5%
99 Refused 1%
Section 9: Background & Demographics
Thank you so much for your participation. I have just a few background questions for statistical purposes.

D1 Do you own or rent your residence in Atherton?
1 Own 88%
2 Rent 2%
99 Refused 10%
D2 Which of the following best describes your home?
1 Detached, single family residence 95% Ask D3
2 Townhome or condominium 0% Skip to End
3 Apartment 0% Skip to End
99 Refused 4% Skip to End

Page 88 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 8
D3 How large is your parcel?
1 Less than ¼ acre 3%
2 ¼ acre to less than ½ acre 10%
3 ½ acre to less than 2 acres 81%
4 2 acres or larger 4%
99 Refused 2%
Those are all of the questions that I have for you. Thanks so much for participating in this important survey.

Post-Interview & Sample Items
S1 Gender
1 Male 53%
2 Female 47%
S2 Party
1 Democrat 32%
2 Republican 47%
3 Other 1%
4 DTS 19%
S3 Age on Voter File
1 18 to 29 8%
2 30 to 39 5%
3 40 to 49 12%
4 50 to 64 34%
5 65 or older 39%
99 Not coded 2%
S4 Registration Date
1 2013 to 2009 21%
2 2008 to 2005 10%
3 2004 to 2001 9%
4 2000 to 1997 7%
5 Before 1997 53%

Page 89 of 96 ends

Questionnaire & Toplines
Town of Atherton True North Research, Inc. © 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Atherton Parcel Tax Survey June 2013
True North Research, Inc. © 2013 Page 9
S5 Household Party Type
1 Single Dem 11%
2 Dual Dem 11%
3 Single Rep 12%
4 Dual Rep 21%
5 Single Other 5%
6 Dual Other 5%
7 Dem & Rep 9%
8 Dem & Other 9%
9 Rep & Other 16%
0 Mixed (Dem + Rep + Other) 1%
S6 Homeowner on Voter File
1 Yes 86%
2 No 14%
S7 Likely to Vote by Mail
1 Yes 71%
2 No 29%
S8 Likely November 2013 Voter
1 Yes 50%
2 No 50%
S9 Likely June 2014 Voter
1 Yes 79%
2 No 21%
S10 Likely November 2014 Voter
1 Yes 100%
2 No 0%

Page 90 of 96 ends

To the Atherton Town Council:

With this note I would like to voice my support for the idea of a community survey being conducted in Atherton focusing on all major town functions and services.

By way of background, my name is Matt McWright and I have lived in Atherton since 2005. My interest in this survey is primarily driven by my role serving on the board of Atherton Disaster and Preparedness Team (ADAPT), an organization I have been a part of for approximately ten years.

While no one questions the merits and need to be disaster prepared living in our area, people exist on a wide spectrum of readiness to in fact take action to be prepared. This is no doubt due to a host of factors and conflicting demands. Our community having a volunteer organization devoted to helping our neighbors be better prepared is sensible and prudent, of course. That being said, what do we really know about how our fellow residents feel about being prepared, and what exactly would help them become better prepared, are relevant questions.

Having been a part of ADAPT across three eras of its leadership, I am struck by the inconsistency we experience in our efforts to engage with our residents. It often feels in fact like we are “a service in search of a market,” when it would optimize our efforts to know our market first and adapt our services accordingly.

A community survey would be a very useful exercise to these ends. Since the relative ambivalence about being disaster prepared could undermine participation in a survey devoted to just this topic, I am a big fan of this survey being embedded in a broader survey of other Town functions—library, police, administration, etc.—that ought improve the likelihood of ADAPT getting quality feedback (while of course garnering useful information for these functions). In terms of execution, I would advocate for less is more, such that each function seeking feedback be exacting and targeted in the questions asked, that the overall survey demands don’t become onerous to our residents.

In any case, I can certainly pledge ADAPT’s readiness and willingness to participate in the construction of any such survey should the Town Council see the wisdom in this exercise. As I understand it, it has been a decade since such a survey took place, and given the changes in our Town during that time, I’d say we’re due.

Sincerely,
Matt McWright

Page 91 of 96 ends

Item No. 3
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – STUDY SESSION
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROBERT BARRON III, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DATE: FEBRUARY 7, 2024
SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE THE MID-YEAR BUDGET REPORT FOR FY 2023/24

RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the Mid-Year Budget Review for the General Fund for FY 2023/24.

BACKGROUND
The FY 2023/24 Mid-Year Budget Report provides the Council with information about the status of the Town’s financial condition at the half-way point in the Fiscal Year. The Report highlights the current year expenditures, year-end estimates, and identifies any significant issues which may impact the upcoming budget. A Mid-Year Budget Adjustment Resolution will return to the Council at the February Regular Meeting.

The FY 2023/24 Mid-Year Budget Report projects total revenues of $25.2m (an increase of $1.4m). This is an increase from the Adopted Budget of $23.7m. This is primarily due to increases in Property Taxes, ERAF, charges for services, and other revenues.

The FY 2023/24 Mid-Year Budget Report projects expenditures at $20.2m (an increase of $365,000). This is an increase from the Adopted Budget reflecting $19.8m. This is primarily due to one-time expenditures for operations and maintenance needs.

In summary, this is a net positive change (revenues over expenditures) of $1m resulting in a projected Year End Fund balance of $12m (inclusive of reserves).

Page 92 of 96 ends

FYI 2023/24 Mid-Year Budget Staff Report
February 7, 2023

Page 2 of 5 ends

FINDINGS | ANALYSIS
FY 2023/2024 Mid-Year Revenue Summary
FY 2023/2024
Adopted Budget
FY 2023/2024
Year End Estimate
FY2023/24 YearEnd Variance% Change
Revenues
Property Taxes $15,126,595 $15,124,003 ($2,592) (0.01%) ERAF $2,300,000 $2,633,605 $333,605 14.5%
Sales Taxes $321,100 $409,100 $88,000 27.4%
Franchise Fees $1,056,000 $1,056,000 0 0%
Intergovernmental $40,700 $40,700 0 0%
Business License $283,600 $283,600 0 0%
Planning $298,300 $405,300 $107,000 35.8%
Building $1,665,000 $2,107,000 $442,000 27.3%
Police $285,690 $561,690 $276,000 96.6%
DPW $769,700 $794,700 $25,000 3.2%
Park Program $207,500 $74,500 ($133,000) (178%)
Miscellaneous $1,412,289 $1,716,188 $303,899 21.51%
Total Revenue $23,766,474 $25,206,386 $1,439,911 6.05%
The FY 2023/24 Budget projected total property tax revenue at $15,126,271. Anticipated Property Tax Revenue for 2023/24 reflects a slight decrease of ($2,593). Secured and Unsecured property taxes show an increase of $181,900 for the fiscal year. Property Tax in lieu of VLF reflects a decrease of ($184,493). This is attributed to the Town anticipating receiving the remainder of FY 2022/23 VLF funds and continued estimated VLF shortfall for FY 2023/24.

The Town’s ERAF Revenue for FY 2023/24 is $2,633,605. This is an increase of $333,605 over the budget of $2,300,000. ERAF Revenue has fluctuated over the past several years from as low as $1,020,000 to now as high as $2,633,605. In FY 2022/23 the Town received $2,339,064 in ERAF and its use was toward additional allocation toward Town CIP. The Council will review and direct ERAF during the annual budget process. ERAF is not included as part of the Town’s required operational revenues.

Planning and Building Revenue anticipate increases for a total of $549,000. This is due to the anticipated increase in permit fees expected to go into effect in March. Police Revenue is experiencing an increase of $276,000 due to donations received for health and wellness programs and various training. Park Program activity is projecting a decrease in revenue due to the slowdown in Park reservations and the Town no longer having Catered Too as the Park Event Manager. There is an increase in Miscellaneous Revenue of $303,889 at Mid-Year. This is due to an increase in construction time limit forfeitures. These are one-time revenues. All other Town revenues remain static.

Page 93 of 96 ends

FYI 2023/24 Mid-Year Budget Staff Report
February 7, 2023

Page 3 of 5 ends

FY 2023/2024 Mid-Year Expenditure Summary
FY 2023/2024
Adopted Budget
FY 2023/2024 Year
End Estimate
FY2023/24 YearEnd Variance% Change
Expenditures
City Council $69,015 $69,015 0 0%
Administration $1,279,479 $1,279,479 0 0%
City Attorney $310,000 $310,000 0 0%
Finance $866,652 $866,652 0 0%
Planning $1,674,819 $1,674,819 0 0%
Building $1,361,829 $1,604,829 $243,000 17.8%
Interdepartmental $1,055,542 $1,102,542 $47,000 4.45%
Police $9,529,827 $9,584,827 $55,000 .56%
Public Works $3,661,445 $3,681,445 $20,000 .54%
Total $19,808,608 $20,173,608 $365,000 1.84%
Departments are expected to meet budget appropriations or may report lower operational expenses at end of the Fiscal Year. There are several adjustments needed to the Operating Budget. These adjustments total $365,000.

The Building Contract is revenue based. This is an adjustment in expenditures due to the anticipated increase in revenue. The projected increase in revenue requires an additional expenditure adjustment of $243,000.

The Town maintains IT support for the Town through Infinity Technologies that includes fulltime on-site tech support 3 days a week and 24-hour online support via the Interdepartmental Budget. Infinity provides services for all Town IT related needs at the Town Center, the Park, and the Library, plus special projects. The first two years of the contract for IT support set compensation at $163,200 per year. The service delivery model was 3 onsite days per week.

However, due to the complexity of systems, service required and networks, actual service is 4.5 days per week. The Fiscal Year 2023/24 Budget anticipated a reduction in IT Services during this 3 rd year of the contract. However, support is required at the current level of service. Most of the support is necessary due to IT upgrades within the Police Department. During the Fiscal Year 2024/25 Budget process, staff will work on developing an IT support budget that also includes funding for Police systems project needs that require additional IT support. This requires additional appropriations of $47,000.

The Police Department currently needs additional appropriations for overtime. In prior years, the Department has been able to use funds from regular budgeted salaries since the Department was not fully staffed but maintained a budget for approved staffing levels. The Department overtime applies to a large portion to backfill to maintain the 2 +1 staffing model for each shift.

Backfill is mainly attributed to filling in for sick time, required training, and other related absences such as vacation. This requires additional appropriations of $55,000.

Page 94 of 96 ends

FYI 2023/24 Mid-Year Budget Staff Report
February 7, 2023

Page 4 of 5 ends

With Catered Too no longer providing Park Event Service Management, the Public Works Department is releasing an RFP for Event Management services at the Park. It is anticipated that the new event services will not be onboard until June 2024. Until the new services are in place staff engaged a part-time temporary employee to manage events at the park. This is a one-time cost which requires an additional appropriation of $20,000.

There are no other adjustments required within the FY 2023/24 Budget. Below is a table that reflects the Budget Fund Balance Summary.

FY 2023/2024
Adopted Budget
FY 2023/2024
Year End Estimate
FY2023/24 YearEnd Variance
Excess (Deficiency) Revenues
over Expenditures
$3,957,866 $5,032,778
Transfers out:

COP Debt Service ($861,871) ($861,871)
CIP Future Projects ($5,890,000) ($5,890,000)
Net Change Fund Balance ($2,794,005) ($1,719,093) $1,074,911 Beginning Fund Balance $13,791,636 $13,791,636
FY 2023/24 Estimate Ending
Fund Balance
$10,997,631 $12,072,543
FY 2023/24 Projected Year End Balance $12,072,543
15% Emergency Reserve Requirement ($3,026,041)
15% Contingency Reserve Requirement ($3,026,041)
American Rescue Plan Reserve ($1,707,000)
FY 2023/24 Projected Unallocated Fund Balance $4,313,461 The FY 2023/24 beginning total Fund Balance was $13,791,636 (inclusive of the mandatory reserves). At the conclusion of FY 2023/24, after transfers out for Debt Service, the abovereflected departmental adjustments, and the transfer of funds to CIP future projects, the end of year fund balance projection is $12,072,543 (this includes all mandatory reserves).

POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
The Mid-Year Budget Report is an opportunity to make adjustments and operations corrections based on unanticipated changes and the goals and priorities of the City Council. If there are projects or priorities that the Council wishes to address at mid-year, this is the opportunity to do so. The Mid-Year Budget Report encompasses all changes to the budget thus far in the Fiscal Year. Staff will bring back a Budget Amendment Resolution to the February Regular Meeting to reflect the noted adjustments.

Page 95 of 96 ends

FYI 2023/24 Mid-Year Budget Staff Report
February 7, 2023

Page 5 of 5 ends

FISCAL IMPACT
Discussed above, the overall fiscal impact to the General Fund due to Mid-Year adjustments is a General Fund Net expenditure increase of $365,000 (1.8%) against a General Fund (plus ERAF) revenue increase of $1,439,911 (6.5%).

GOAL ALIGNMENT
Goal A- Maintain Fiscal Responsibility

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,200 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders – to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

ATTACHMENTS
None.

Page 96 of 96 ends

Atherton City CouncilFebruary 7, 2024

Atherton City Council
February 7, 2024