Staff Report
City Council
Item No. 2.B
Meeting Date: August 26, 2026
From: Anne V. Ambrose, Assistant City Manager
Title: Establishment of a Legislative Advocacy Policy
RECOMMENDATION:
To review and consider options for establishing a City Council legislative advocacy policy.
BACKGROUND:
Legislative and intergovernmental advocacy has become an increasingly important function of municipal government. Cathedral City routinely receives requests to submit letters supporting or opposing legislation from the League of California Cities, commenting on regulatory proposals, endorsing grant applications, supporting neighboring jurisdictions, and participating in regional or statewide coalition efforts.
Unlike ordinances and resolutions, legislative correspondence often must be completed within compressed timelines established by legislative committees, funding agencies, or state and federal departments. Consequently, municipalities have developed varying governance models that balance timely advocacy with City Council oversight.
The City of Cathedral City does not have an adopted policy for handling legislative advocacy requests. This study session is intended to begin a discussion with the City Council on the common approaches utilized by California municipalities to manage legislative and intergovernmental correspondence with the purpose of seeking input on the development of a legislative advocacy policy for the City.
The purpose of this report is to provide objective information regarding the various approaches employed by municipalities, describe the administrative workflows associated with each model, and identify considerations that may assist the City Council in determining whether a formal legislative advocacy policy would benefit the City.
DISCUSSION:
Cities routinely interact with state, federal, regional, and local governmental agencies through written correspondence. These communications may include:
1. Letters supporting or opposing legislation
2. Grant support letters
3. Congressional Community Project Funding requests
4. Budget advocacy letters
5. Agency comment letters
6. Regulatory comments
7. Regional coalition letters
8. Joint letters with neighboring jurisdictions
9. Requests for administrative action
10.Intergovernmental partnership correspondence
Legislative requests are frequently received with deadlines that do not coincide with regularly scheduled City Council meetings. Depending upon the governance structure adopted by a municipality, cities may require Council approval prior to issuing correspondence, authorize administrative action under an adopted legislative platform, or utilize a combination of both approaches.
As legislative advocacy has expanded throughout California, many municipalities have adopted formal procedures governing when and how legislative correspondence may be issued. Those procedures tend to fall into three governance models.
Prominent Governance Models
Model 1: Council-Adopted Legislative Platform with Delegated Administrative Authority
Under this model, the City Council adopts an annual Legislative Platform (sometimes called a Legislative Policy Guide or Legislative Action Platform) establishing the City's legislative priorities and policy positions.
Once adopted, administrative staff are authorized to prepare legislative correspondence that is consistent with the adopted platform without returning to Council for approval of each individual request.
Typically, delegated authority applies only when proposed legislation clearly aligns with previously adopted Council policy.
Typical Workflow
1. Legislative Request Received
2. Staff Review
3. Does Request Align with Adopted Legislative Platform?
4. YES
5. Prepare Letter
6. Mayor/Authorized Official Signs
7. Letter Sent
8. Council Receives Copy
9. Included in Periodic Legislative Report
If the request falls outside the adopted platform, it generally returns to City Council for direction.
Examples of this model include Indio, Lakewood, Beverly Hills, and Cupertino, which also reflect varying examples of complexity. These approaches are summarized below while supporting information on each are provided as attachments.
Indio and Lakewood are each focused on a core set of issues reflecting local priorities.
Indio’s legislative platform adopted in 2025 focuses on: 1) local control; 2) economic investment; 3) public safety; 4) collaboration with other governmental agencies; 5) commercial and residential neighborhoods; 6) infrastructure, climate resiliency, and environmental quality; and 7) housing and land use.
Lakewood focuses on positions that clearly impact the city or pose a threat to local control.
They also specifically include support for federal, state, and county funding through earmarks, grants, and other discretionary funding in their policy. Lakewood also lists organizations whose legislative programs the city follows in their platform, such as the League of California Cities.
Beverly Hills and Cupertino, in contrast, have more robust legislative platforms that include specific and detailed position statements. Both cities are actively engaged in legislative affairs and advocacy. Beverly Hills, through its legislative platform, delegates responsibility for its implementation to staff and legislative lobbyists; the city publishes position letters on its website together with its legislative platform. Cupertino’s legislative platform is managed by city staff in conjunction with a council subcommittee.
Model 2: Administrative Action with Subsequent Council Ratification Under this model, correspondence may be issued prior to Council approval when external deadlines require immediate action. The correspondence is subsequently presented to the City Council for ratification.
This approach balances timely advocacy with public oversight.
Typical Workflow
1. Request Received
2. Deadline Before Next Council Meeting?
3. If YES
4. Prepare Letter
5. Authorized Signature
6. Letter Sent
7. Council Agenda Report
8. Council Ratifies Action
The City of Palm Desert presents a strong example of this model, which is summarized below and attached for reference.
While Palm Desert does not have a formal legislative platform, it has instituted an administrative policy ratified by the city council that vests the authority to issue legislative and intergovernmental letters with their mayor and mayor pro tem. Any letters issued by their mayor and mayor pro tem are then placed on the next available council agenda for ratification.
Their policy contains provisions related to politically sensitive and controversial items and those instances when their mayor and mayor pro tem disagree on a position. Their city manager also has a role and may direct that any proposed letter be submitted to the full council for consideration, particularly when it is politically sensitive or controversial. Their policy also has provisions for letters requesting funding or grants for city-initiated projects, allowing their mayor to issue these without council ratification.
Model 3: Case-by-Case City Council Approval
Each legislative request is individually considered by the City Council. No correspondence is transmitted unless specifically authorized during a public meeting.
Typical Workflow
1. Request Received
2. Staff Review
3. Agenda Report
4. City Council Meeting
5. Council Direction
6. Prepare Letter
7. Letter Sent
Many smaller municipalities effectively utilize this model, particularly where legislative requests occur infrequently or where a formal legislative platform has not been adopted.
Cathedral City has followed this approach for the 2026 legislative year.
Comparative Analysis of the Models
Feature Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Council establishes legislative
policy
Yes Yes Yes
Council acts on every request No After action Before action Administrative delegation Yes Limited No
Ability to respond to legislative
deadlines
High High Moderate to low
Council agenda workload Lower Moderate Higher
Routine legislative reporting Yes Yes Through agenda process Recommendation
Staff have not heard City Council express a desire for a proactive legislative platform and staff is not recommending the City Council consider an approach like those deployed in Beverly Hills or Cupertino. Rather, staff has heard the City Council express that it does not want to engage in state or federal matters that may be perceived as partisan politics and that it may prefer to either follow the lead of an organization such as League of California Cities or to let it advocate on the City’s behalf. At issue, though, are the continued requests for the City to take positions, including those from other agencies and even the League of California Cities itself, and the absence of a policy to consider the requests.
Currently, the City considers requests on a case-by-case basis, and it may continue to do so, although this may not always be responsive to legislative deadlines and has the potential to add to the Council agenda workload.
An approach similar to what has been deployed in Palm Desert, Model 2 as it is described in this staff report, would create a more streamlined process for the consideration of requests while maintaining both City Council’s involvement through a subcommittee and checks and balances through a ratification process. This approach is also flexible in the sense that the policy does not detail specific positions as are seen in some of the more robust examples.
This is the staff recommended approach.
If the Council were inclined to establish specific position statements, staff recommends an approach similar to those taken by Indio and Lakewood, subsets of Model 1, where a legislative platform identifies those key local priorities or positions the Council wants to advocate for at a state or federal level but is not so detailed where the platform itself becomes controversial or where it is difficult to maintain over time.
Should the City Council direct staff to prepare a legislative policy, staff recommends that it include some consideration for letters of support for earmarks, grants, and other discretionary funding.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact with this report.
FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal C – Fiscal Stability and Sustainability