Agenda packet — Lakeport City Council, September 1, 2026

If you cannot attend in person, and would like to speak on an agenda item, you can access the Zoom meeting remotely:

Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device:

Please click this URL to join. Zoom Meeting Link Passcode: 477973 Or join by phone:

Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):

US: +1 669 900 9128 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 Webinar ID: 973 6820 1787
Passcode: 477973
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/abNyiaqY1I Virtual Meeting Participation
Zoom attendees will remain in listen-only mode until public comment is invited. To speak, use the Raise Hand feature when prompted; the organizer will enable your audio when it is your turn, and you may need to unmute yourself. General comments should be made during General Public Comment, while comments concerning a specific agenda item should be made during that item’s public comment period.

Joining by telephone: Press *9 to raise or lower your hand. When called upon, press *6 to unmute yourself; press *6 again to mute when finished.

Public Comment via Email
The City wants you to know that you can also submit your comments by email to [email protected].

To give the City Clerk adequate time to print out your comments for consideration at the meeting, please submit your written comments prior to 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 1, 2026.

Please indicate in the email Subject Line "FOR PUBLIC COMMENT" and list the item number you wish to comment on.

Comments that you want read to the Council will be subject to the three minute time limitation (approximately 350 words).

Written comments that are only to be provided to Council and not read at the meeting will be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting.

AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKEPORT CITY COUNCIL
(ALSO MEETS AS THE CITY OF LAKEPORT MUNICIPAL SEWER DISTRICT, THE LAKEPORT INDUSTRIAL

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THE MUNICIPAL FINANCING AGENCY OF LAKEPORT, THE LAKEPORT GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABLITY AGENCY and THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FORMER LAKEPORT

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY)
Tuesday, September 1, 2026 6:00 p.m.

City Council Chambers, 225 Park Street, Lakeport, California 95453 See Teleconferencing Instructions Below
City Council Agenda of September 1, 2026 Page 2
AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKEPORT CITY COUNCIL
(ALSO MEETS AS THE CITY OF LAKEPORT MUNICIPAL SEWER DISTRICT, THE LAKEPORT INDUSTRIAL

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THE MUNICIPAL FINANCING AGENCY OF LAKEPORT, LAKEPORT GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AUTHORITY and THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FORMER LAKEPORT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY)*
Tuesday, September 1, 2026, 6:00 p.m.

City Council Chambers, 225 Park Street, Lakeport, California 95453 *All references to “City Council” include those other agencies which are listed above The City Council may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on the agenda irrespective of how the agenda items are described. The council may establish and make appointments to a Council committee (made up of two Councilmembers) with respect to any item appearing on this agenda.

I. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL: 6:00 p.m.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA/
URGENCY ITEMS:

Move to accept agenda as posted or move to add or delete items.

To add item, Council is required to make a majority decision that an urgency exists (as defined in the Brown Act) and a 2/3rds determination that the need to take action arose subsequent to the agenda being posted.

IV. CONSENT AGENDA: The following Consent Agenda items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without any discussion. Any Council Member may request that any item be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion under the regular Agenda. Removed items will be considered following the Consent Calendar portion of this agenda.

A. Ordinances: Waive reading except by title, of any ordinances under consideration at this meeting for either introduction or passage per Government Code Section 36934.

B. Minutes: Approve the minutes of the August 18, 2026 regular City Council meeting.

C. Application 2026-037: Approve application 2026-037, with staff recommendations, for reserved parking for voters on Forbes Street during the voting period for the November 3, 2026 election.

D. Application 2026-038: Approve application 2026-038, with staff recommendations, for the Rotary Torch Relay for Polio event and fundraiser in Xabatin Park.

V. PUBLIC
PRESENTATIONS/REQUESTS:

A. Public Input: Any person may speak for 3 minutes about any subject within the authority of the City Council, provided that the subject is not already on tonight’s agenda. Per Government Code §54954.3(a), the City Council cannot take action or express a consensus of approval or disapproval on any public comments regarding matters which do not appear on the printed agenda.

VI. COUNCIL BUSINESS:

A. City Manager

1. CalCities Annual
Conference Resolution:

Direct the City's designated voting delegate to either support or oppose Resolution No. 1, if forwarded to the Cal Cities General Assembly substantially in its current form, and to exercise reasonable discretion consistent with Council's direction regarding any amendments considered during the General Assembly.

VII. CITY COUNCIL
COMMUNICATIONS:

A. Travel, Calendar, and
Miscellaneous Reports, if any:

City Council Agenda of September 1, 2026 Page 3
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office at 225 Park Street, Lakeport, California, during normal business hours. Such documents are also available on the City of Lakeport’s website, www.cityoflakeport.com, subject to staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting.

The City of Lakeport, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend and/or participate in the City meeting due to disability, to please contact the City Clerk’s Office, (707) 263-5615, 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting to ensure reasonable accommodations are provided. _____________________________________
Hilary Britton, Deputy City Clerk
City Council Minutes of August 18, 2026 Page 2

MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKEPORT CITY COUNCIL
(ALSO MEETS AS THE CITY OF LAKEPORT MUNICIPAL SEWER DISTRICT, THE LAKEPORT INDUSTRIAL

I. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL: Mayor Disney called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. with Council Members Parlet, Mattina and Price present. Council Member Costa was absent.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Disney.

III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA/
URGENCY ITEMS:

A motion was made by Council Member Mattina, seconded by Council Member Parlet, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 0 abstentions, 1 absent or 4-0-0-1 to accept the agenda as posted.

A. Ordinances: Waive reading except by title, of any ordinances under consideration at this meeting for either introduction or passage per Government Code Section 36934.

B. Minutes: Approve the minutes of the August 4, 2026 regular City Council meeting.

C. Hitch Agreement: Authorize the Mayor to execute the revised Clear Lake Watershed and Chi (Ṣátti) CoManagement Agreement on behalf of the City of Lakeport, superseding and replacing the Clear Lake Watershed and Chi (Ṣátti) Co-Management Agreement previously authorized for signature on July 21, 2026.

Vote on Consent Agenda: City Manager Ingram requested to pull item C. Hitch Agreement due to a need for a small addition on Page 3.

A motion was made by Council Member Price, seconded by Council Member Parlet, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to approve the Consent Agenda, items A-C and including the amendments made to item C.

V. PUBLIC
PRESENTATIONS/REQUESTS:

A. Public Input: Elaine Brown suggested forming a volunteer organization for young people that could partner with struggling businesses, providing assistance while also gaining valuable learning experience.

Bethany Childers addressed the Council regarding her recent separation from City employment and expressed concerns about how the separation and related impacts were handled.

B. Presentation: George Spurr, Trustee of the Lake County Vector Control District provided a presentation on current and ongoing activities of the District, primarily in the detection of West Nile Virus.

City Council Minutes of August 18, 2026 Page 3
Elaine Brown spoke about DDT and its negative impacts.

VI. COUNCIL BUSINESS:

A. Public Works Director

1. Local Road Safety Plan: The staff report was presented by Public Works Director Ladd. Lauren Picou from GCW Engineers and Surveyors gave an overview of the project’s key findings and methodologies.

A motion was made by Council Member Mattina, seconded by Council Member Parlet, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to approve the resolution adopting the City of Lakeport 2026 Local Road Safety Plan.

B. Finance Director

1. Merchant Cost
Consulting:

The staff report was presented by Finance Director Dizon. Matt Smith from Merchant Cost Consulting provided additional detail on the services they provide to attain cost savings for the City.

A motion was made by Council Member Parlet, seconded by Council Member Mattina, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Merchant Cost Consulting, LLC to review, negotiate, and optimize the City's merchant credit card processing fees.

2. Credit Card Processing
Fees:

The staff report was presented by Finance Director Dizon.

A motion was made by Council Member Parlet, seconded by Council Member Mattina, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to adopt the resolution establishing a $2.00 service fee for certain utility payments made by credit or debit card, effective October 18, 2026, and authorize staff to implement the fee in accordance with Government Code Section 6159.

C. Community Development Director

1. CDBG Housing Planning
Grant Closeout:

The staff report was presented by Community Development Director Hejnowicz.

Mayor Disney opened the Public Hearing at 7:50 p.m. and with no input from the public, closed the Public Hearing at 7:51 p.m.

A motion was made by Council Member Price, seconded by Council Member Parlet, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to (1) Accept the completed planning policy and procedure documents, including the May 2026 City of Lakeport Housing Conditions Survey; and (2) Authorize staff to complete and submit all required grant closeout documentation to the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

1. CDBG-DR Additional
Funds Allocation:

Prior to the presentation of this item, Council Member Price stated that, because she is acting as the real estate agent for three properties located at 1263, 1267, and 1271 Fenway Avenue, which are in proximity to the Parkside Apartment project, she would recuse herself from the discussion and vote on the item. Council Member Price then left the Council Chamber.

The staff report was presented by Community Development Director Hejnowicz.

Chris Westlake, developer on the project, answered questions of the City Council.

City Council Minutes of August 18, 2026 Page 4
A motion was made by Council Member Parlet, seconded by Council Member Mattina, and unanimously carried by voice vote 3-0-1-1 to adopt the Resolution approving and accepting an allocation of $1,978,000 in CDBG-DR gap funding for the Parkside Apartments project and authorizing the City Manager to execute a grant agreement with the California Department of Housing and Community Development and any amendments thereto.

Council Member Price returned to the Council Chamber after the item was complete.

D. Police Chief

1. Purchase Patrol Vehicles: The staff report was presented by Lt. Cooley.

A motion was made by Council Member Mattina, seconded by Council Member Parlet, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to (1) Award the purchase of two 2027 Dodge Durango Pursuit Utility All-Wheel Drive patrol vehicles to Thurston Dodge of Ukiah; (2) Award vehicle upfitting to Wicked Sounds; (3) Authorize the procurement of two Motorola Solutions M500 Mobile Audio-Video systems; (4) Authorize the procurement of two L3Harris XL-200M mobile radios; (5) Authorize police vehicle markings from Signs by Randy Hare; (6) Authorize a total project cost not to exceed $198,397.28, inclusive of a 7 percent contingency; and (7) Authorize the Chief of Police to sign the necessary purchase orders and supporting contract documents.

1. Conductive Energy
Equipment:

The staff report was presented by Lt. Cooley.

A motion was made by Council Member Parlet, seconded by Council Member Price, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to authorize the Chief of Police to execute a 60-month purchase agreement with Axon Enterprise, Inc. for thirteen (13) TASER 10 Conducted Energy Weapons and the associated equipment identified in Axon Quote Q-793540-46235SB, in a total amount not to exceed $72,113.46, including estimated sales tax.

E. City Manager

1. Letter of Support -
Opportunity Zones:

The staff report was presented by City Manager Ingram.

A motion was made by Council Member Mattina, seconded by Council Member Parlet, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to authorize the Mayor to sign the letter supporting the designation of all nine eligible Lake County census tracts as Opportunity Zones and direct staff to submit the letter during the State's Opportunity Zones 2.0 public comment period.

2. Letter of Appreciation -
Lakeport Lights Drone
Show:

The staff report was presented by City Manager Ingram.

A motion was made by Council Member Parlet, seconded by Council Member Mattina, and unanimously carried by voice vote 4-0-0-1 to authorize the Mayor, on behalf of the Lakeport City Council, to sign and transmit a letter of appreciation to the Lake County Board of Supervisors for its support and partnership in the 2026 Lakeport Lights Drone Show.

VII. CITY COUNCIL
COMMUNICATIONS:

City Council Minutes of August 18, 2026 Page 5
A. Travel, Calendar, and
Miscellaneous Reports, if any:

Community Development Director Hejnowicz offered no report.

Police Chief Stoebe was absent.

Lt. Cooley reported that Clearlake PD will be assisting with Patrol on a limited number of shifts. The PD phone system continues to fail to connect to dispatch and AT&T is working on repairs.

Utilities Director Harris was absent.

Finance Director Dizon offered no report.

Administrative Services Director Buendia offered no report.

Public Works Director Ladd announced that the 4-way stop at 11th and Forbes will be installed tomorrow. There will be flagging staff onsite and warning signs have been in place for over a week, along with several social media posts released.

Planning Services Manager Fernandez offered no report.

City Attorney Anderson offered no report.

City Manager Ingram offered no report.

Council Member Costa was absent.

Council Member Parlet expressed concerns about the effectiveness of rapid flashing beacons and other roadway safety measures, noting instances where beacons appeared to activate without pedestrians present and concerns about pedestrian behavior. He emphasized that while roadway safety programs are valuable, infrastructure improvements alone cannot eliminate all accidents and must be accompanied by greater awareness and education.

Council Member Price offered no report.

Council Member Mattina thanked Council Member Parlet for the time and effort he devoted to reviewing the Local Road Safety Plan and expressed appreciation for his helpful insight.

Mayor Disney reported on the $850,000 in federal funding for the South Main Street widening project and efforts to coordinate water line improvements, as well as continued Lake County Recreation Agency discussions regarding pool and recreation center options. He also shared that the recent Young Professionals Network gathering at the Lakeport Marina drew 15–20 attendees and generated enthusiasm for future business opportunities in Lakeport and Lake County.

VIII. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Disney adjourned the meeting at 8:35 p.m. _____________________________________
Brandon Disney, Mayor
Attest:
______________________________________
Kelly Buendia, City Clerk

!"#$#%&$'(&)*+

"&,!"
-* .""/ + 0"* 1 2*

!"#$#%&$'(3)*

""456

5
2

3 7
8*9
"
2!"39)
: "*"
;:9*

95

2 3<

<9"

)

2$=>$?>#$#%<9"
!"/
2 )9"
5

5$@>#A>#$#% B2 "
939
"
9 C
DEFGHIJHEKKLMNOPO QRSTUVWXUVWYRZ[\]R^_Z`abTSRZcXa_Z WXUV_def[RS_ZU gghifZ[bUZRRU ef[RS_ZUjWklhmhn opqprgsnthsuhvuqg wxZXUU_yz^XUV_dYf[RS_ZU{^_| }~

_ZiTxYX^]R^_Z`ak^UZRTRaUajSYRfaRcXaXU_TZ

__[UX|RU_|RRU¡XUw|R

!
" # $ #
%

&'
%

()* ()*

(&

%

+
+
+
+

#
# +

,
( -
%

.

-
-
%

'/0 # #
%

'
0
%

(

%

123456789:;<:
=>.?>
)@A@BCADEC
F
C:) G>H I FJ/
)@A@BCADE$
"

$ ! K
)$
L ML

$ *
*
ANOAPO@A@B*
)I AQO@RO@A@B <$ 0
STUVWXYWTZZ[\]^_^ `abcdefgdefhaijklamniopqcbairgpni fgdenstujabnid vvwxuijqdiaad tujabnidyfz {w|w} ~v}ww v igddnmgdenshujabnidmn ¡¢£¢¤¥£¢¦ §¨£¢£¢¤£¢££©£§ª «¬nixchgmlamniopzmdiacapdpybhaupargpgdnci£¢®£ ¯°°±²³´µ²°´µµ²¶³²·´µ

!"#$#%&$'(&
& )*+,
-."
.*

/0 1""2 , 3"0 4 *0
*

!"+
*5

6 )*+,
+78
9 "0 "
:970

7;

*
+<

<7"

8

*$=>$?>#$#%<7"
!"2
* 87"
;

;$(>#%>#$#% )* "
7+7
"
7 @ ABCDEFGEBHHIJKLML NOPQRSTURSTVOWXYZO[\W]^_QPOW`U^\W TURS\abcXOP\WR ddefcWX_RWOOR bcXOP\WRgThiejek lmnmodpkqepresrnd tuWURR\vw[URS\aVcXOP\WRx[\y z{|}~
}}}|~~}
|}}~~}~ }}|} ~~~|
\WfQuVU[ZO[\W]^h[RWOQO^R^gPVOc^O`U^UR\QW~ ~|

\\XRUyOR\yOORURtyO

Memorandum
DATE: August 24, 2026
TO: Mark Lipps
FROM: Brendin Conant, EHS
RE: RFR APP 2026-038 - Rotary - Relay Torch for Polio & Snack Shack
APN: Xabatin Community Park, Lakeport
The Lakeport Rotary (Sponsor) must apply and pay for a temporary permit for a community event at least two weeks prior to the event from the Lake County Environmental Health Division Office. The food vendors must apply and pay for the temporary permit for the community event from the Lake County Environmental Health Division Office at least two weeks prior to the event.

Please note:

1. If the sponsor is going to be selling food at this event, then the sponsor must also apply and pay for a food vendor permit.

2. The temporary permit, once issued, is not transferable, and is only good for that specific community event only.

COUNTY OF LAKE
Health Services Department
Environmental Health Division
922 Bevins Court
Lakeport, California 95453-9739
Telephone 707/263-1164
FAX 707/263-1681
Craig Wetherbee, REHS
Environmental Health Director
Promoting an Optimal State of Wellness in Lake County
Meeting Date: 09/01/2026 Page 1 Agenda Item # VI.A.1.

CITY OF LAKEPORT
City Council
City of Lakeport Municipal Sewer District
Lakeport Industrial Development Authority
Municipal Financing Agency of Lakeport

STAFF REPORT
RE: Cal Cities 2026 Annual Conference Resolution and Voting Delegate Direction
MEETING DATE: 09/01/2026
SUBMITTED BY: Kevin M. Ingram, City Manager
PURPOSE OF REPORT: Information only Discussion Action Item WHAT IS BEING ASKED OF THE CITY COUNCIL/BOARD:

The City Council is being asked to review the resolution submitted for consideration at the League of California Cities (Cal Cities) 2026 Annual Conference and Expo and provide direction to Mayor Disney, whom the Council designated on July 21, 2026 as the City's voting delegate, regarding the City's position when the resolution is considered by the Cal Cities General Assembly.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The Cal Cities 2026 Annual Conference and Expo will be held September 23-25, 2026, at the Anaheim Convention Center. As part of the conference, Cal Cities member cities participate in the General Assembly and resolutions process, which provides cities an opportunity to consider policy proposals that may become Cal Cities policy.

Cal Cities received one general resolution by the July 25, 2026 submission deadline. Resolution No. 1 was submitted by the City of Murrieta and is titled, "A Resolution of the General Assembly of the League of California Cities Calling for a Working Group to Consider a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Form of Initiative to Ensure Final Local Authority Over Housing and Land Use Decisions." (See Attachment 1).

Overview of Proposed Resolution No. 1:

Resolution No. 1 calls for Cal Cities to support the development and advancement of a state constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategy intended to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters. The areas identified include general plans, housing elements, zoning, density, design and development standards, project siting, and the approval or denial of housing development applications.

The resolution also states that any future strategy should preserve the State's authority to establish broad statewide housing goals and enforce constitutional and civil rights, fair housing requirements, building and lifesafety standards, and generally applicable environmental protections. At the same time, it seeks to protect cities from state actions that override locally adopted zoning, density standards, or land use decisions when a city has planned in good faith to accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Allocation and maintains adequate housing capacity.

Rather than prescribing a specific constitutional amendment or policy mechanism, the resolution would have Cal Cities consider establishing a statewide working group or other appropriate committee to evaluate possible approaches. That work could include legal, fiscal, and policy analysis; engagement with cities and other Meeting Date: 09/01/2026 Page 2 Agenda Item # VI.A.1.
stakeholders; and development of a statewide coalition. The resolution identifies the November 2030 General Election, or another reasonable timeframe determined by the working group, as a potential horizon for a ballotbased strategy.

Cal Cities' staff analysis notes that the resolution itself would not have a significant direct fiscal impact; however, future actions arising from the effort could involve significant costs, particularly if a statewide ballot initiative is ultimately pursued.

Existing Cal Cities Policy Direction on Local Control and Housing:

In considering Resolution No. 1, it may be helpful to view the proposal within Cal Cities' already-adopted policy framework. Cal Cities' March 2026 Summary of Existing Policy and Guiding Principles (see attachment 3) states that the organization's mission is to expand and protect local control for cities and identifies local selfgovernance as a cornerstone of democracy. The Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committee's existing policy is similarly grounded in fostering local control of community planning decisions involving land use and economic development.

Local Control and Land Use. Existing Cal Cities policy strongly emphasizes municipal authority over planning and zoning. Cal Cities supports use of a city's general plan as the guide for local land use planning and strategic decision-making and opposes mandatory state or regional review, certification, or approval of general plans. Cal Cities also states that local zoning is a primary function of cities and an essential component of home rule, and that state policy should generally leave local siting and land use decisions to cities. Existing policy further supports retaining local land use decision-making authority when considering issues such as water supply, subdivisions, development fees, and implementation of density bonus requirements.

Housing Policy. At the same time, Cal Cities' adopted policies recognize statewide housing needs and support active efforts to increase housing supply, particularly affordable housing. Existing policy supports state and federal financing, fiscal tools, incentives, and infrastructure funding that assist local governments in facilitating affordable housing. Cal Cities also supports reforms to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and housing element processes that use realistic planning assumptions, recognize that cities facilitate rather than directly construct housing, provide fair dispute-resolution and enforcement mechanisms, and reward communities that achieve measurable affordable housing production.

Current Advocacy Priorities. These principles are also reflected in Cal Cities' 2025-26 Advocacy Priorities (see Attachment 2). One of the organization's four adopted priorities is to secure investments to prevent and reduce homelessness and increase the supply of affordable housing. Within that priority, Cal Cities calls for ongoing funding to accelerate affordable housing construction, reform of the RHNA process, and ensuring that cities retain flexibility and local decision-making authority to meet both community and state housing goals.

Taken together, the existing policy framework reflects two complementary objectives: supporting meaningful housing production and statewide housing goals, while preserving substantial local discretion over how those goals are planned for and implemented within individual communities. Resolution No. 1 would build upon the local-control side of that existing framework by directing Cal Cities to evaluate whether a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategy should provide stronger protections for local housing and land use authority. Council may consider the extent to which the proposed resolution is consistent with, expands upon, or changes the balance reflected in Cal Cities' currently adopted policies when providing direction to the City's voting delegate.

Cal Cities Review and Voting Process:

The resolution has been referred to the Cal Cities Housing, Community, and Economic Development Policy Committee, of which Mayor Pro Tem Mattina is an appointed member on behalf of the Redwood Division. The Policy Committee is scheduled to review the resolution on September 17, 2026, and forward a recommendation to the Resolutions Committee.

The Resolutions Committee will meet during the Annual Conference on Thursday, September 24, 2026. It will consider the resolution and the Policy Committee's recommendation and may approve, disapprove, take no action, amend and approve, or refer the matter for further study. If the resolution is disapproved or referred for Meeting Date: 09/01/2026 Page 3 Agenda Item # VI.A.1.
further study by both the Policy Committee and the Resolutions Committee, it will not proceed to the General Assembly.

The General Assembly will convene Friday, September 25, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. Each Cal Cities member city may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates. At its July 21, 2026 meeting, the City Council unanimously designated Mayor Disney as the City's voting delegate, Council Member Price as the first alternate, and Mayor Pro Tem Mattina as the second alternate for the 2026 Cal Cities Annual Conference. Voting delegates must check in at the voting delegate booth before voting. Mayor Disney, or an alternate if necessary, will cast Lakeport's vote on any resolution forwarded to the General Assembly consistent with the direction provided by the City Council.

Resolutions receiving approval recommendations from both the Policy Committee and Resolutions Committee are placed on the Consent Calendar. Other resolutions that advance may be placed on the Regular Calendar for individual discussion and vote. General Assembly votes are conducted first by voice vote. If the outcome cannot be determined, an alternative method, typically voting cards, may be used. A roll call vote may be requested by delegates representing at least ten percent of the General Assembly.

Because the Policy Committee and Resolutions Committee may amend the resolution before it reaches the General Assembly, Council may wish to provide its voting delegate with both a preferred position on the resolution as currently drafted and general direction regarding how to respond to amendments that may occur during the conference.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Council direction regarding a Cal Cities policy resolution is an organizational and administrative activity and is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

OPTIONS:

1. Direct the City's voting delegate to support Resolution No. 1 if it is forwarded to the Cal Cities General Assembly substantially in its current form.

2. Direct the City's voting delegate to oppose Resolution No. 1 if it is forwarded to the Cal Cities General Assembly substantially in its current form.

3. Take no formal position and authorize the City's voting delegate to exercise discretion based on the final resolution and discussion at the General Assembly.

4. Provide alternative or additional direction to the City's voting delegate.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None $ Budgeted Item? Yes No
Budget Adjustment Needed? Yes No If yes, amount of appropriation increase: $ Affected fund(s): General Fund Water OM Fund Sewer OM Fund Other:

Comments: Providing direction to the City's voting delegate has no direct fiscal impact. The Cal Cities staff analysis similarly indicates that the resolution itself has no significant direct fiscal impact, although future legislative, policy, or ballot-related activities undertaken by Cal Cities could have costs.

Meeting Date: 09/01/2026 Page 4 Agenda Item # VI.A.1.

COUNCIL PRIORITIES:
☐ Priority #1: Public Safety & Crisis Response
☐ Priority #2: Disaster Resiliency
☒ Priority #3: Good Governance & Fiscal Stability
☐ Priority #4: Capital Infrastructure Improvement
☒ Priority #5: Safe, Sustainable & Attractive Neighborhoods ☐ Priority #6: Economic Development
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:

Move to direct the City's designated voting delegate to [SUPPORT / OPPOSE] Resolution No. 1, if forwarded to the Cal Cities General Assembly substantially in its current form, and to exercise reasonable discretion consistent with Council's direction regarding any amendments considered during the General Assembly.

Attachments: 1. Cal Cities 2026 Resolution Packet

2. League of California Cities 2025-26 Advocacy Priorities

3. Cal Cities Summary of Existing Policy and Guiding Principles (March 2026) 2025-2026

CAL CITIES OFFICERS
President
Gabe Quinto
Mayor
El Cerrito
First Vice President
Teresa Acosta
Council Member
Carlsbad
Second Vice President
David Cohen
Council Member
San Jose
Immediate Past President
Lynne B. Kennedy
Mayor Pro Tem,
Rancho Cucamonga
Executive Director
and CEO
Carolyn M. Coleman
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org August 10, 2026
TO: Cal Cities Members
RE: Cal Cities 2026 Resolution Packet
Sixty days before the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Cal Cities members may submit resolutions on issues of importance to cities. This year, Cal Cities received one resolution by the July 25 deadline.

The attached packet contains the proposed resolution, background information, supporting letters from cities and city officials, and an analysis of the resolution by Cal Cities. The packet includes detailed information on the resolution process and the next steps for the resolution.

We encourage each city council to consider the resolution and determine a position so your voting delegate can represent your city’s position on the resolution.

Voting Delegates: City councils must appoint a voting delegate to vote during the General Assembly. Each city may also appoint up to two alternate delegates. If your city has not already done so, please appoint your voting delegate by Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2026. The voting delegate packet contains more information.

The 2026 General Assembly will be held Friday, Sept. 25, at 8:30 a.m. in the Anaheim Convention Center during the Annual Conference and Expo.

For questions about resolutions, voting delegates, or the General Assembly, please contact Zach Seals.
2026
Resolution
Packet
2026 Resolution Packet
Information on 2026 Resolutions Process
Consideration by Policy Committee (pre-conference)
Per the Cal Cities bylaws, Cal Cities President Gabe Quinto has referred the submitted resolution to the Housing, Community, and Economic Development Committee. The committee will meet on Thursday, Sept. 17, at 10 a.m. via Zoom to review the resolution and make a recommendation that will be sent to the Resolutions Committee. A public comment period will be held during the meeting. Register for the meeting here.

A list of recommendations the policy committee may make during its meeting is on page two of this packet.

Consideration by Resolutions Committee (during conference) On Thursday, Sept. 24, at 1:00 p.m. the Resolutions Committee will meet to review the resolution and the recommendation of the policy committee.

The Resolutions Committee consist of one representative from each of Cal Cities caucuses, departments, divisions, and policy committees, as well as up to ten additional appointments made by the Cal Cities President. A public comment period will be held during the meeting. Refer to the onsite conference program for the location.

A list of recommendations the Resolutions Committee may make during its meeting is on page two of this packet.

Consideration by the General Assembly (during conference) The General Assembly will convene on Friday, Sept. 25, at 8:30 a.m. to consider any resolutions the Resolutions Committee has forwarded. To vote during the General Assembly, voting delegates must have checked in at the voting delegate booth.

Conference attendees will receive materials for the General Assembly on the evening of Thursday, Sept. 24. For more information on voting and discussion procedures during the General Assembly, see page three of this packet.

Petitioned Resolutions (during conference)
The petitioned resolution is an alternate method to introduce policy proposals during the annual conference. To initiate a petitioned resolution, voting delegates from 10% of member cities must sign the petition. The resolution and signatures are due at least 24 hours before the beginning of the General Assembly. Voting delegates who have checked in at the voting delegate booth can receive more information on petitioned resolutions at the booth onsite. 1 2026 Resolution Packet
Policy Committee and Resolutions Committee Actions
The submitted resolution will be heard by the policy committee to which it was assigned, and the Resolutions Committee. The table below shows what recommendations these bodies may make on the resolution.

Policy Committee Actions Resolutions Committee Actions
Approve Approve
Disapprove* Disapprove*
No Action No Action
Amend and approve Amend and approve
Refer to appropriate policy committee
for further study*
Approve as amended
Refer as amended to appropriate
policy committee for further study*
Refer to appropriate policy committee
for further study*
Refer as amended to appropriate
policy committee for further study*
Approve with additional
amendment(s)
Additional amendments and refer to
appropriate policy committee for
further study*
*If a resolution is disapproved or referred for further study by all policy committees to which it is assigned and the Resolutions Committee, it will not proceed to the General Assembly. 2 2026 Resolution Packet
General Assembly Voting and Discussion Procedures
Discussion Procedures:

Discussion procedures during the General Assembly are guided by two calendars:
the Consent Calendar and the Regular Calendar. As seen below, resolutions are calendared by the recommendations they receive from policy committees and the Resolutions Committee.

For General Resolutions:

Policy Committee
Recommendation
Resolutions Committee
Recommendation Calendar
Approve Approve Consent Calendar
Approve Disapprove or refer Regular Calendar
Disapprove or refer Approve Regular Calendar
Disapprove or refer Disapprove or refer Does not proceed to General Assembly
For Petitioned Resolutions:

Policy Committee
Recommendation Resolutions Committee Action Calendar
N/A
Approve Regular Calendar
Disapprove or Refer Regular Calendar
Disqualified Does not proceed to General
Assembly
Items on the Consent Calendar will be presented as one motion during the General Assembly from the Resolutions Committee chair. Unless an item on the Consent Calendar is set aside by the majority of the General Assembly, a vote will be taken on the whole calendar. If an item is set aside, it will be opened for discussion, followed by a vote.

Items on the Regular Calendar will be presented individually by the Resolutions Committee chair. After a recommendation is presented by the Resolutions Committee chair, the resolution will be opened for discussion by the General Assembly. A vote will take place following discussion.

Voting Procedures:

Per Cal Cities Bylaws Article XII, Sec. 2, all votes will be conducted by voice vote first. If the presiding official cannot determine the outcome, a vote will be taken by an alternative method, typically a raise of voting cards by voting delegates. A roll call vote may be called for by delegates of ten percent or more of the General Assembly.
3 2026 Resolution Packet
2026 Resolution

1. Resolution No. 1 submitted by City of Murrieta
• Letters of concurrence submitted by:
i. City of Banning;
ii. City of Calimesa;
iii. City of Canyon Lake;
iv. City of Moreno Valley;
v. City of Norco;
vi. City of Torrance;
vii. Crystal Ruiz, Mayor, City of San Jacinto;
viii. Jessica Alexander, Mayor, City of Temecula
• Referred to Housing, Community, and Economic Development Committee
• Policy Committee Recommendation:
• Resolutions Committee Recommendation:
4 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1
Submitted by City of Murietta
5 2026 Resolution Packet

1. A RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES

CALLING FOR A WORKING GROUP TO CONSIDER A STATE CONSTITUTIONAL

AMENDMENT OR OTHER FORM OF INITIATIVE TO ENSURE FINAL LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER

HOUSING AND LAND USE DECISIONS
Source: City of Murrieta
Concurrence of five or more cities/city officials
Cities/city officials: City of Banning; City of Calimesa; City of Canyon Lake; City of Moreno Valley; City of Norco; City of Torrance; Crystal Ruiz, Mayor, City of San Jacinto; Jessica Alexander, Mayor, City of Temecula
Referred to: Housing, Community, and Economic Development Policy Committee WHEREAS, California cities have historically been responsible for adopting general plans and zoning regulations, reviewing housing development proposals, and providing or coordinating the streets, water, wastewater, public safety, parks, transportation, and other infrastructure and services necessary to support responsible, environmentally sound, and well-planned residential growth; and
WHEREAS, the League of California Cities is dedicated to protecting and expanding local control for municipalities across the state to ensure their orderly growth and development; and
WHEREAS, the League of California Cities recognizes that local zoning is a primary function of cities and an essential component of home rule, and that a city’s general plan should guide its land use planning and strategic decision-making free from pre-emption by the state; and
WHEREAS, increasingly prescriptive statewide housing mandates and development approval requirements can override locally adopted plans, zoning standards, and public review procedures without adequately accounting for differences that exist in each unique jurisdiction in infrastructure capacity, water availability, wildfire and evacuation risks, environmental constraints, fiscal impacts, public service needs, and community priorities; and
WHEREAS, California’s housing goals can be more effectively advanced through state funding, streamlined environmental requirements, and voluntary partnerships that support housing production while preserving the authority of locally elected officials to determine how and where housing is best planned and approved; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, assembled during the Annual Conference in Anaheim, California, on September 25, 2026, that the League of California Cities support the development and advancement of a state constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballotbased strategies that restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters within municipal boundaries, including general plans, housing elements, zoning, density, design and development standards, project siting, and the approval or denial of housing development applications; and
6 2026 Resolution Packet
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any constitutional amendment or alternative strategy should preserve the State’s authority to establish broad statewide housing goals and enforce constitutional and civil rights, fair housing requirements, building and life-safety standards, and generally applicable environmental protections, while protecting cities from state actions that compel, through funding conditions or state law, the approval of housing developments that are inconsistent with locally adopted requirements; override local zoning or density standards; or invalidate locally adopted housing or land use decisions when a city has planned in good faith to accommodate its regional housing needs allocation and maintains adequate capacity for housing at all income levels; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the League of California Cities consider establishing a statewide working group or other appropriate committee(s) to evaluate and develop a proposed constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters including but limited to: conducting appropriate legal, fiscal, and policy analyses; engaging cities and other stakeholders; and building a statewide coalition of proponent supporters in preparation for; the November 2030 General Election, or within another reasonable time frame as determined by the working group.
7 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1: Background
Information
8 2026 Resolution Packet
Background Information for Resolution
Source: City of Murrieta
Background:

California cities are responsible for planning residential growth, adopting general plans and zoning regulations, reviewing development proposals, and providing or coordinating the infrastructure and public services necessary to support new housing. Since 2010, the State has enacted more than 500 housing-related laws that have increasingly shifted housing and land use authority away from local governments. These laws have expanded by-right development, limited locally adopted standards and review processes, and established enforcement mechanisms, including the builder’s remedy, that may override local plans and zoning. Although these measures are frequently presented as solutions to housing affordability, many increase development capacity or restrict local review without delivering the meaningful production of housing needed to address the housing crisis.

At the same time, the State has continued to prioritize increased development capacity without adequately accounting for the infrastructure, public services, economic realities, and safety measures necessary to support housing growth.

State mandates often fail to reflect local conditions, including roadway and utility capacity, water availability, wildfire exposure, environmental limitations, fiscal impacts, and the availability of essential services. Cities are consequently required to accommodate additional housing while receiving no funding or assistance to address the resulting infrastructure and service demands.

Local elected officials are directly accountable to the residents who experience the effects of development decisions and are responsible for balancing housing production with infrastructure capacity, public safety, environmental protection, fiscal sustainability, and community needs. Cities of all types in California have been grappling with this dynamic, ranging from urban to rural, coastal to inland, small to large, northern to southern, voicing concerns to legislative representatives with minimal responsiveness. This is an issue of statewide concern that needs the strength and diversity of the League of California Cities to pursue a long-term solution.

The proposed resolution directs the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions. The working group would be tasked with developing a more balanced framework that preserves the State’s role in establishing broad housing goals and enforcing constitutional, civil rights, fair housing, building, life-safety, and environmental requirements, while restoring meaningful local authority to allow cities to determine how statewide housing 9 2026 Resolution Packet
objectives should be implemented in a manner that reflects local conditions and community priorities while continuing to support responsible housing production.

As the primary statewide organization representing California cities, the League is uniquely positioned to lead this effort. Its established policy, legal, legislative, communications, and advocacy networks enable it to convene municipalities, evaluate potential strategies, conduct legal and fiscal analyses, build consensus, engage stakeholders, and coordinate with statewide decision-makers. League leadership would help ensure that any recommendation reflects the collective interests of California municipalities and would provide the credibility, organizational capacity, and statewide reach necessary to advance a viable strategy.
10 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1: Letters of
Concurrence
11 12
13 July 23, 2026
President Gabe Quinto
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for a Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority Dear President Quinto,
The City of Murrieta is sponsoring a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions.

The proposed resolution, together with the required background materials, will be submitted to Cal Cities for consideration at the 2026 Annual Conference in Orange County on September 24 and

25. The resolution would direct the League to convene a working group to evaluate potential approaches for addressing the increasingly broad and prescriptive state mandates affecting local housing, zoning, development standards, and project approval authority.

On behalf of the City of Canyon Lake, this letter confirms our support for the City of Murrieta’s submission of the proposed resolution and its consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly at the 2026 Annual Conference.

Sincerely,
Arron Brown
City Manager
City of Canyon Lake
14 July 23, 2026
President Gabe Quinto
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for a Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority Dear President Quinto,
The City of Murrieta is sponsoring a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions.

The proposed resolution, together with the required background materials, will be submitted to Cal Cities for consideration at the 2026 Annual Conference in Orange County on September 24 and 25. The resolution would direct the League to convene a working group to evaluate potential approaches to address increasingly broad and prescriptive state mandates affecting local housing, zoning, development standards, and project approval authority.

On behalf of the City of Moreno Valley, this letter confirms our support for the City of Murrieta’s submission of the proposed resolution and its consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly at the 2026 Annual Conference.

Sincerely,
Brian Mohan
City Manager
City of Moreno Valley

15 July 22, 2026
President Gabe Quinto
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for a Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority
Dear President Quinto,
The City of Murrieta is sponsoring a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions.

The proposed resolution, together with the required background materials, will be submitted to Cal Cities for consideration at the 2026 Annual Conference in Orange County on September 24 and 25. The resolution would direct the League to convene a working group to evaluate potential approaches for addressing the increasingly broad and prescriptive state mandates affecting local housing, zoning, development standards, and project approval authority.

On behalf of the City of the Norco, this letter confirms our support for the City of Murrieta’s submission of the proposed resolution and its consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly at the 2026 Annual Conference.

Sincerely,
Kevin Bash
City Council Member
(951) 768-8981
16 17
18 19
20 July 23, 2026
Mr. Gabe Quinto, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for the City of Murrieta's Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority Dear President Quinto:

I am writing in my individual capacity as Mayor of the City of Temecula to express my strong support for the City of Murrieta's proposed resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities at the 2026 Annual Conference.

The proposed resolution presents an important opportunity to thoughtfully evaluate the appropriate balance between California's statewide housing objectives and the constitutional principle of local governance. Establishing a statewide working group to examine a potential constitutional amendment, legislative reforms, or other policy initiatives will provide a meaningful forum to assess how local authority over housing and land use decisions can be strengthened while continuing to address the State's housing challenges.

Cities are uniquely positioned to understand the needs, opportunities, and constraints of their communities. Local elected officials are accountable to the residents they serve and are best equipped to make land use decisions that reflect a community's character, infrastructure capacity, economic development goals, environmental stewardship, and long-term vision. Equally important, local governments bear the primary responsibility for protecting public safety. Decisions regarding housing density, transportation, emergency access, wildfire preparedness, evacuation routes, police and fire service capacity, water availability, and critical infrastructure are inherently local matters that require the knowledge and judgment of those who serve their communities every day.

While the State has an important role in addressing California's housing needs, a collaborative approach that respects local expertise and preserves meaningful local discretion will produce stronger, safer, and more sustainable communities. The proposed working group offers an opportunity to evaluate policies that achieve these shared objectives while restoring an appropriate balance between state direction and local authority.
21 Mr. Gabe Quinto, President
League of California Cities
July 23, 2026

Page 2 ends

Although this letter reflects my personal position and is not an official action or policy of the City of Temecula or the Temecula City Council, I respectfully endorse the City of Murrieta's submission of this resolution and encourage its favorable consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly.

Thank you for your leadership and your thoughtful consideration of this important issue.

Respectfully,
Jessica Alexander
Mayor, City of Temecula
Signing in her individual capacity
and not on behalf of the City of Temecula
or the Temecula City Council.
22 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1: Staff Analysis
23 League of California Cities Staff Analysis on Resolution No. 1 Staff: Brady Guertin, Legislative Advocate
Committee: Housing, Community, and Economic Development Summary:

Resolution No.1 states that the League of California Cities (Cal Cities) will:

1. Support the development and advancement of a state constitutional amendment or legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategy that restores and strengthens local authority over housing and land use matters, including general plans, housing elements, zoning, density, design and development standards, project siting, and the approval or denial of housing development applications.

Pursuant to the resolution, the strategy should preserve the state’s authority to set broad, statewide housing goals and enforce civil rights, fair housing, building safety, and environmental standards while protecting local control by preventing the state from compelling the approval of developments that conflict with local requirements, override local zoning or density standards, or overturn local land use decisions where a city has planned for and maintained sufficient capacity to meet its housing obligations.

2. Consider establishing a statewide working group or other appropriate committee(s) to evaluate and develop a proposed constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters.

The resolution states: “conducting legal, fiscal, and policy analyses; engaging cities and other stakeholders; and building a statewide coalition of proponent supporters in preparation for the November 2030 General Election, or within another reasonable time period.” Background:

As provided in the background information, the city of Murrieta is sponsoring this resolution in response to concerns over state laws that have increasingly reduced city discretion over housing and land use decisions, including legislation that requires ministerial or by-right approvals for housing projects, limits the application of local development standards, and strengthens state enforcement mechanisms against local governments.

Additionally, the city of Murrieta, in its background information, maintains that these legislative efforts have not resulted in sufficient housing production to address California's housing shortage and have not adequately accounted for 24 local infrastructure, public service needs, public safety, market, and fiscal considerations.

The resolution states that California’s housing goals are better advanced through state funding, streamlined environmental requirements, and voluntary partnerships, while preserving local authority over how and where housing is best planned and approved.

Consideration of the resolution may be informed by a brief examination of how the California Constitution allocates authority between the state and cities with respect to land use decisions.

The constitution grants cities the power to adopt local laws to protect the public’s health, safety, and welfare. This grant is called the “police power,” which is the basis for local land use regulation. The constitution grants charter cities the additional power to adopt local laws affecting “municipal affairs.” This power, commonly referred to as “home rule,” is based on the principle that a city, rather than the state, is in the best position to identify and satisfy the needs of the local community.

The constitution’s broad grant of police power contains a significant limitation.

Local law adopted under the police power is not valid if it “conflicts” with state law. A local law “conflicts” with state law when it regulates the same “field” in which the Legislature has stated its intent to occupy. In that case, state law is said to “preempt” the local law and it cannot be enforced.

An ordinance adopted by a charter city under the municipal affairs power cannot be enforced if it affects a “matter of statewide concern.” The subjects that have been identified as “matters of statewide concern” have changed over the years due to economic, social, and political circumstances.

Since the 1960s, the state has enacted numerous laws that limit or preempt aspects of local land use and zoning authority. These laws include the Fair Employment and Housing Act, Housing Element Law, Housing Accountability Act, Density Bonus Law, Permit Streamlining Act, accessory dwelling unit laws, California Environmental Quality Act, and others. In recent years, the state has enacted several laws that Cal Cities was the leading opposition force against, as many of the proposals pre-empted local land use authority, limited public review, and constrained local flexibility. In support of its housing and land use legislation, the Legislature has cited a statewide housing crisis and the need for increased housing production at all income levels while asserting that a uniform approach to local land use decision-making is required. 25 Discussion:

The resolution does not prescribe a specific policy mechanism. The eight letters in support recommend creating a working group or committee to evaluate potential approaches, including legislative proposals, constitutional amendments, or ballot initiatives to strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters.

A discussion of a strategy to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters will need to consider the California Constitution’s framework for both preemption of police power enactments and municipal affairs, discussed above. It will also need to determine whether changes to the California Constitution will be proposed, and whether they constitute an amendment or a revision, which require different processes.

A constitutional revision is a multistep process blending legislative consensus, voter support, and on occasion, a constitutional convention. It requires significant public engagement.

A constitutional amendment would require a ballot initiative, which includes gathering enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot, building large coalitions to support election efforts, and campaigning to voters to support the initiative. This process can involve significant costs. In the last major election for ballot initiatives in 2024, proponents spent $8-$18 million to qualify for the ballot and spent nearly $700 million for the full election cycle, averaging out to about $100 million per ballot initiative.

Cal Cities has been engaged in ballot advocacy for over 20 years. In the early 2000s, Cal Cities developed a ballot advocacy infrastructure that included forming an issue political action committee, fundraising, establishing a network of regional managers, and building a coalition with other organizations to ultimately advocate on a ballot measure. Ballot advocacy requires the approval of the Board of Directors with a supermajority vote.

In the Legislature, Cal Cities plays an active and influential role to ensure that local flexibility and autonomy in the land use and housing space is maintained by engaging on dozens of bills every legislative session to ensure that cities' voices are heard at the state Capitol. Below, you will find Cal Cities “Existing Policy” on local control, housing, and land use policies.

Fiscal Impact
The resolution itself would not have a significant direct fiscal impact. However, depending on what actions follow, the fiscal costs could be significant. 26 Existing Cal Cities Policy
Vision
To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California's cities.

Mission Statement
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.

We Believe
• Local self-governance is the cornerstone of democracy. • Our strength lies in the unity of our diverse communities of interest. • In the involvement of all stakeholders in establishing goals and in solving problems.
• In conducting the business of government with transparency, openness, respect, and civility.
• The spirit of honest public service is what builds communities. • Open decision-making that is of the highest ethical standards honors the public trust.
• Cities are vital to the strength of the California economy. • The vitality of cities is dependent upon their fiscal stability and local autonomy.
• The active participation of all city officials increases the League's effectiveness.
• Partnerships and collaborations are essential elements of focused advocacy and lobbying.
• Ethical and well-informed city officials are essential for responsive, visionary leadership and effective and efficient city operations.

Zoning
Cal Cities believes local zoning is a primary function of cities and is an essential component of home rule. The process of adoption, implementation and enforcement of zoning ordinances should be open and fair to the public and enhance the responsiveness of local decision-makers. State policy should leave local siting and use decisions to the city and not interfere with local prerogative beyond providing a constitutionally valid procedure for adopting local regulations. State agency siting of facilities, including campuses and office buildings, should be subject to local notice and hearing requirements in order to meet concerns of the local community. Cal Cities opposes legislation that seeks to limit local authority over parking requirements.

Housing Element
Housing issues should be addressed in the general plan as other planning issues are. The housing element should be prepared for the benefit of local 27 governments and should have equal status with the other elements of the general plan.

Encourage Full Community Participation
Foster an open and inclusive community dialogue and promote alliances and partnerships to meet community needs.

Well-Planned New Growth
Recognize and preserve open space, watersheds, environmental habitats, and agricultural lands, while accommodating new growth in compact forms, in a manner that:
• De-emphasizes automobile dependency;
• Integrates the new growth into existing communities;
• Creates a diversity of affordable housing near employment centers; • Provides job opportunities for people of all ages and income levels.

Support:

The following letters of concurrence were received:

City of Banning
City of Calimesa
City of Canyon Lake
City of Moreno Valley
City of Norco
City of Torrance
Crystal Ruiz, Mayor, City of San Jacinto
Jessica Alexander, Mayor, City of Temecula
28 League of California Cities 2025-26 Advocacy Priorities

1. Protect and enhance local revenues and expand economic development tools.

Californians are deeply concerned about affordability. Cities must safeguard local revenue streams, oppose unfunded mandates, and pursue new economic development tools that bolster local economies.

2. Strengthen partnerships with the state to improve public safety.

The progress cities have been making to strengthen public safety must be sustained.

Cities call on the state to respect the will of the voters and provide the resources needed to fully implement Proposition 36. Cities support sustained investments in police, fire services, and public works as a foundation of public safety.

3. Secure investments to prevent and reduce homelessness and increase the supply of affordable housing.

Secure ongoing funding to bolster all cities’ efforts to support unhoused residents and strengthen state and regional partnerships to expand access to wraparound services.

Secure ongoing funding to accelerate the construction of affordable housing and reform the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process.

Ensure cities have the flexibility and local decision-making authority to meet their community and state housing goals as well as reduce homelessness.

4. Strengthen climate change resiliency and disaster preparedness.

Support city efforts to prepare, prevent, and adapt to natural disasters and the impacts of climate change, including wildfires, drought, sea level rise, and other extreme weather events. Increase transparency and access to insurance policies, especially following a natural disaster.

Summary of
Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
MARCH 2026
Strengthening California Cities
through Advocacy and Education
ii | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The vitality of cities is dependent upon their
fiscal stability and local autonomy.
The active participation of all city officials
increases Cal Cities’ effectiveness.
Partnerships and collaborations are essential
elements of focused advocacy and lobbying.
Ethical and well-informed city officials are
essential for responsive, visionary leadership
and effective and efficient city operations.

About Cal Cities
Established in 1898, the League of California
Cities is a member organization that represents
California’s incorporated cities. Cal Cities strives to protect the local authority and autonomy of city
government and help California’s cities effectively
serve their residents.

In addition to advocating on cities’ behalf at the
state capitol, Cal Cities provides its members
with professional development programs and
information resources, conducts educational
conferences and research, and publishes a
monthly magazine and weekly newsletter.

Mission Statement
To expand and protect local control for cities
through education and advocacy to enhance the
quality of life for all Californians.

Vision
To be recognized and respected as the
leading advocate for the common interests of
California’s cities.

We Believe
Local self-governance is the cornerstone of
democracy.
Our strength lies in the unity of our diverse
communities of interest.
In the involvement of all stakeholders in
establishing goals and in solving problems.
In conducting the business of government
with transparency, openness, respect,
and civility.
The spirit of honest public service is what
builds communities.
Open decision-making that is of the highest
ethical standards honors the public trust.
Cities are vital to the strength of the
California economy.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | iii

INTRODUCTION
Introduction
We are pleased to present the 15th edition of Cal Cities Summary of Existing Policy and Guiding Principles. In a process that continues today, the first version was prepared in 1997 by researching and summarizing policy guidelines and positions on past legislation adopted by Cal Cities, as well as past annual conference resolutions.

The Summary was developed with the assistance of the seven standing Cal Cities policy committees and the Cal Cities Board of Directors to ensure the content accurately reflects existing Cal Cities policy. The 2026 edition reflects policy changes adopted by Cal Cities through February 2026, following a review of Cal Cities’ positions on recent legislation and annual conference resolutions. The Summary is posted on Cal Cities’ website in its entirety, as well as on individual policy committee pages.

The Summary of Existing Policy and Guiding Principles is intended to be a living reference, updated biennially, to reflect changes to Cal Cities policy. Cal Cities uses it to review new legislation and determine how it relates to existing Cal Cities policy. The Summary can also be used to better understand Cal Cities policy and positions on state and federal legislation.

We encourage cities to adopt all or part of the Summary so that they can respond in a timely manner to new legislation introduced at the state and federal levels. This will permit cities to become more active in the legislative process and involved in issues impacting cities. Quick, thoughtful action on these issues helps your community, helps us, and Californians throughout the state.

We hope you will find the Summary useful in your city’s involvement in the legislative process and Cal Cities. Please do not hesitate to relay any comments you may have about this reference guide to the Cal Cities Sacramento office. Your suggestions are always welcome.

Carolyn M. Coleman
Executive Director and CEO
League of California Cities
March 2026
iv | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
California Environmental Protection Act (CEQA)............. 16 Definition of a Project........................................................................ 18 Significant Environmental Effect ............................................... 18 Alternatives............................................................................................... 19 Streamlining ............................................................................................ 19 Coastal Issues .......................................................................................... 19 Miscellaneous.......................................................................................... 19 California Water Guidelines............................... 21 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 22 APPENDIX A...................................................................................32 APPENDIX B.................................................................................. 34 GLOSSARY...................................................................................... 34 Governance, Transparency,
and Labor Relations ................................................ 40 SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY ...............................................40 Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles...........................................................................40 Labor Relations .....................................................................................40 Public Sector Pensions, Compensation and
Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEBs)..................40 CalPERS (California Public Employees’
Retirement System)..................................................................... 42 Workers’ Compensation..................................................................44 Other Employer and Employee Related Issues................44 Transparency .........................................................................................44 Equity in Governance ....................................................................... 45 Open Meeting Law (Ralph M. Brown Act)
& Open Access to Public Records
(California Public Records Act).............................................. 45 Political Reform Act of 1974 (PRA).............................................46 Governance and Ethics ....................................................................46 Elections ....................................................................................................46 Recall Elections ..................................................................................... 47 Elected Officials .................................................................................... 47 Legal Issues ............................................................................................. 47 Data and Privacy Protection.........................................................48 Contents
Community Services....................................................2 SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY ..................................................2 Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles.............................................................................. 2 Animals.......................................................................................................... 2 Arts, Cultural Resources, Historic Preservation
and Activities....................................................................................... 2 Child Care..................................................................................................... 2 Children......................................................................................................... 2 Housing for Homeless ......................................................................... 3 Behavioral Health ................................................................................... 3 Substance Use.......................................................................................... 3 Residential Care Facilities.................................................................. 3 Park Bond Funds .................................................................................... 3 Public Parks/Recreational Facilities ............................................ 3 Public Libraries.........................................................................................4 Seniors ...........................................................................................................4 Healthy Cities.............................................................................................4 Community Disaster Preparedness ...........................................4 Smoking and Tobacco Control.......................................................4 Environmental Quality...............................................6 SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY .................................................6 Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles.............................................................................. 6 Air Quality ....................................................................................................6 Climate Change.......................................................................................6 Natural Disaster Preparedness ......................................................8 Hazardous Materials..............................................................................8 Solid Waste and Recycling................................................................9 Electronic Waste....................................................................................10 Household Hazardous Waste........................................................10 Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)...............................10 Single-Use Plastics.................................................................................11 Energy and Utilities ...............................................................................11 Community Choice Aggregation.................................................12 Microgrids...................................................................................................13 Electric Industry Restructuring ....................................................13 CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Housing, Community and Economic
Development .....................................................................49 SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY ...............................................49 Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles...........................................................................49 Planning And Zoning........................................................................49 Housing Element................................................................................. 50 Housing Finance ................................................................................. 50 Economic Development ...................................................................51 Eminent Domain....................................................................................51 Tenant Protections ...............................................................................51 Subdivision Map Act ............................................................................51 Density Bonus Law ...............................................................................51 Development Fees................................................................................51 Annexation and Incorporation.....................................................52 Development Agreements.............................................................52 Building Standards..............................................................................52 Military Base Closure and Reuse.................................................52 Mobile Home Regulation.................................................................52 Sign Regulation .....................................................................................52 Principles for Smart Growth ..........................................................53 Residential Insurance Policy......................................................... 54 Public Safety....................................................................... 55 SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY ................................................55 Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles............................................................................55 Fire Services..............................................................................................55 Emergency Services and Preparedness.................................56 Law Enforcement .................................................................................56 Mental Health/Substance Use Disorder .................................57 Police Use of Force.............................................................................. 58 Drones......................................................................................................... 58 Fireworks................................................................................................... 58 Wildland Urban Interface ...............................................................59 Nuisance Abatement .........................................................................59 Indian Gaming........................................................................................59 Gaming........................................................................................................59 Alcohol ........................................................................................................59 Cannabis Regulation.........................................................................60 Graffiti .........................................................................................................60 Sex Offender Management ...........................................................60 Corrections...............................................................................................60 Firearms...................................................................................................... 61 Miscellaneous.......................................................................................... 61 Revenue and Taxation.............................................62 SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY ............................................... 62 Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles............................................................................62 Cities and Cal Cities .............................................................................62 Legislature or the Voters ..................................................................63 State Mandates ......................................................................................63 Additional Revenue.............................................................................63 Reduce Competition .........................................................................64 Funding for Counties..........................................................................65 Regional Revenues ..............................................................................65 Local Financing and Tax Increment Tools ...........................65 Revenue Modernization ...................................................................65 Federal Streamlined Sales and Use Tax
Agreement (SSUTA) ..................................................................... 66 Federal Legislation Requiring Use Tax Collection........... 67 Transportation, Communications,
and Public Works..........................................................68 SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY ...............................................68 Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles........................................................................... 68 Transportation....................................................................................... 68 Public Works........................................................................................... 70 Micromobility ...........................................................................................71 Vehicles ........................................................................................................71 Contracts....................................................................................................72 Telecommunications..........................................................................72 Plain Old Telephone System (POTS): ........................................74 Air Pollution..............................................................................................74 2 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Children
Cal Cities believes that the children of California
must be recognized as our state’s most valuable
resource. Their development, education, and wellbeing are key to our state’s future. Further, it is essential that each child have the support needed
to become a productive citizen in the world of
the 21st Century. This involves supporting diverse
before-and after-school programs and creating
stronger linkages between municipal services and
school-based job training programs in order to
produce more job placement opportunities.

Cal Cities promotes the development of a
cooperative program with the goal to increase
enrollment of California’s children in the Healthy
Families Program.

Cal Cities encourages cities to promote antibullying efforts across California as well as provide education and awareness to the general public
about the imminent health and safety concerns
for bullied children, especially those with special
needs.

Cal Cities supports increasing opportunities
for California’s youth to participate in civic
engagement activities.

Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
Animals
Cal Cities supports legislation to prevent a person
or animal shelter from selling, giving, or otherwise
transferring living animals to research facilities or
animal dealers.

Arts, Cultural Resources, Historic
Preservation and Activities
Cal Cities supports funding and resources that
recognizes the important role of local arts activities
and historic preservation in community life and
how these cultural activities affect the social health
and economic vitality of cities.

Child Care
Cal Cities supports the creation of more affordable,
innovative and quality parks and recreation and
child care options for parents and concurrently
encourages adherence to strict regulations and
guidelines.

Cal Cities supports funding and resources to
address the affordability and availability of early
learning and care options.

Community Services

SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The Committee on Community Services
reviews issues related to childcare, parks
and recreation, libraries, cultural arts and
community and human services programs.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 3

COMMUNITY SERVICES
Housing for Homeless
Housing and programs for homeless and other
extremely low-income populations are necessary
to ensure quality of life and economic viability for
all Californians.

Homelessness is a statewide problem that
disproportionately impacts specific communities.

The state should make funding and other
resources, including enriched services, and
outreach and case managers, available to help
assure that local governments have the capacity
to address the needs of the homeless in their
communities, including resources for regional
collaborations.

Homeless housing is an issue that eludes
a statewide, one-size-fits-all solution, and
collaboration between local jurisdictions should be
encouraged.

State and federal funding programs should be
designed to reflect responsibilities imposed by
state and federal law.

Behavioral Health
Cal Cities supports additional funding and
resources to expand access to behavioral health
services, including efforts to assist California’s
homeless population, especially those individuals
experiencing mental health and substance use
disorders. This includes, but is not limited to,
supporting counties in expanding communitybased care settings to provide for prevention, intervention, treatment, infrastructure, and
recovery systems.

Substance Use
Cal Cities supports additional funding and
resources to address the substance use crisis
through appropriate prevention and intervention
efforts, educational awareness campaigns, and
increased access to life-saving overdose treatment
aids such as naloxone.

Residential Care Facilities
Cal Cities supports permitting cities to exercise
review and land use regulation of group home
facilities and residential care facilities in residential neighborhoods including the application of
zoning, building, and safety standards. State and
county licensing agencies should be required
to confer with the city’s planning agency in
determining whether to grant a license to a
community care facility. Cal Cities recognizes
that better review and regulation of residential
care facilities will protect both the community
surrounding a facility and the residents within
a facility from a poorly managed facility or the
absence of state oversight.

Cal Cities supports state legislation to require a
minimum distance of 300 feet between all new
and existing residential care facilities. Cal Cities
supports notification of cities about conditional
release participants residing in group homes.

Park Bond Funds
Cal Cities believes that any statewide park bond
measure should include a component that
provides per capita grants to cities and counties.

Cal Cities opposes tying local eligibility for grant
funds to non-park related issues, such as rent
control or housing element status.

Public Parks/Recreational Facilities
While the State of California studies the use of
crumb rubber in synthetic turf and playground
surfaces, Cal Cities opposes legislation that
requires cities to undertake specific actions before
installation can occur.

Cal Cities supports requiring public pools to
provide Automated External Defibrillator during
pool operations.
4 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Public Libraries
Cal Cities supports full funding of the Public
Library Fund so that the State of California can
fully fund its share of the program, understanding
how libraries play an integral role in building
and sustaining our communities. (Additional
library-related policy is included in “Restructuring
California’s Public Library Services,” the report
of a joint task force co-sponsored by Cal Cities,
California State Association of Counties, California
Library Association and the California Association
of Library Trustees and Commissioners.)
Cal Cities opposes legislation that requires public
libraries to install and maintain computer software
for use on computers in the library that prohibits
access to obscene material to minors and other
library patrons. Cal Cities believes that this issue is more appropriately addressed at the local level, in
ways that meet local circumstances, and thus is an
issue of local control.

Seniors
Cal Cities encourages cities to recognize seniors
as a valuable state resource and to develop and
improve intergenerational programs and activities.

Cal Cities supports legislation that would provide
funding for side-by-side day care facilities for
California’s youth, adults, and seniors.

Healthy Cities
Cal Cities encourages California cities to help
parents make healthy family choices; create
healthy schools; provide access to healthy and
affordable foods; and adopt city design and
planning principles that promote physical activity.

Cal Cities encourages cities to involve youth,
especially middle and high school students, with
city health-related programs.

Cal Cities encourages cities to address the
needs of an aging population through local and
statewide planning, education, and conference
programming.

Cal Cities encourages cities to establish their own
rules and regulations pertaining to community
recreational activities.

Community Disaster Preparedness
Cal Cities supports measures that provide
resources for local governments to coordinate
services to assist displaced residents and
communities recover from wildfires, earthquakes,
and other natural disasters.

Smoking and Tobacco Control
Cal Cities supports legislation that establishes a
statewide smoking and tobacco control standard
that includes electronic cigarettes and vapor
products, as long as such legislation does not
preempt the ability of cities and counties to enact
local laws that are stronger than the statewide
standard or to regulate in areas not covered in the
statewide standard. Cal Cities opposes legislation
that would restrict such local authority.

Cal Cities supports legislation that limits the ability of minors to obtain tobacco and tobacco products,
including electronic cigarettes and vapor products.

Cal Cities supports and advocates that all 482
California cities be equitably included in the
distribution of moneys that the state receives
from the Tobacco Settlement Memorandum of
Understanding; and believes that the moneys
received by counties should benefit all cities within
the county and that cities have input into the
decision-making process.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 5

COMMUNITY SERVICES
Cal Cities supports legislation that requires
tobacco retailers to obtain a state-issued license
to sell tobacco products, as long as the legislation
does not restrict or preempt the ability of cities
to enact and enforce their own retail licensing
programs and to enforce the state-wide licensing
program. Cal Cities also supports legislation
designed to restrict the sale of illegal, counterfeit
tobacco products.

Note: Cal Cities will review new legislation to determine how it relates to existing Cal Cities policies and guiding principles. In addition, because this document is updated every two years to include policies and guiding principles adopted by Cal Cities during the previous two years, there may be new, evolving policies under consideration or adopted by Cal Cities that are not reflected in the current version of this document. However, all policies adopted by Cal Cities Board of Directors or Cal Cities General Assembly become Cal Cities policy and are binding on Cal Cities, regardless of when they are adopted and whether they appear in the current version of “Summary of Existing Policies and Guiding Principles.”
6 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
Air Quality
Cal Cities supports inclusion of city officials on
the governing boards of air districts and opposes
efforts to delete such city representation.

Cal Cities believes cities should have the authority
to establish local air quality standards and
programs that are stricter than state and federal
standards. Cal Cities opposes efforts to restrict
such authority.

Cal Cities opposes legislation redirecting the
funds authorized by Health and Safety Code
Section 44223, which are currently used by
local governments for locally based air quality
programs.

Cal Cities opposes air quality legislation that
restricts the land use authority of cities.

Cal Cities supports the requirement that both
public and private diesel garbage trucks be
retrofitted to reduce the amount of particulate
matter pollution emitted from the trucks. (See also
Integrated Waste Management Section below.)
Climate Change
Cal Cities recognizes that climate change is both
immediate and long term, with the potential for
profound environmental, social, and economic
impacts to the planet and to California.

Through the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
(AB 32 (Nuñez), Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006)
California has embarked on a plan that requires
the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to
1990 levels by 2020. Although uncertainty remains
about the pace, distribution, and magnitude of
the effects of climate change, Cal Cities recognizes
the need for immediate actions to mitigate the
sources of greenhouse gas emissions and has
adopted the following principles:
Action Plans for Mitigating Greenhouse
Gas Emissions. Encourage local governments
to complete an inventory of greenhouse gas
emissions, set appropriate reduction targets,
and create greenhouse gas emission reduction
action plans.
Smart Growth. Consistent with Cal Cities
Smart Growth policies, encourage the adoption
of land use policies designed to reduce sprawl,
preserve open space, and create healthy,
vibrant, and sustainable communities.

Environmental Quality

SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The Committee on Environmental Quality
reviews issues related to air, water and water
quality, climate change, CEQA, integrated waste
management, hazardous materials, coastal
issues, and utilities.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 7

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Green Technology Investment Assistance.

Support tax credits, grants, loans, and other
incentives to assist the public, businesses, and
local agencies that invest in energy efficient
equipment and technology, and fuel efficient,
low-emission vehicles.
Energy and Water Conservation and
Efficiency. Encourage energy efficiency, water
efficiency, and sustainable building practices
in new and existing public, residential, and
commercial buildings and facilities. This may
include using the U.S. Green Building Council’s
LEED program or similar systems.
Green Building Guidelines. Cal Cities
encourages state agencies to provide
leadership in developing voluntary, model
statewide residential green building
guidelines that will provide information to
local jurisdictions on how to evaluate and use
different green building strategies. Additionally,
Cal Cities encourages cities to adopt voluntary
residential green building guidelines as a
reference guide, to evaluate available green
building programs and adopt those best
suited for their communities, and to explore
incentives to encourage green building by
private developers of residential construction
projects.
Increase the Use of Clean Alternative
Energy. Promote the use and purchase
of clean alternative energy through the
development of renewable energy resources,
recovery of landfill methane for energy
production and waste-to-energy technologies.
Reduction of Vehicle Emissions in Public
Agency Fleets. Support the reduction of
vehicle emissions through increased fuel
efficiency, use of appropriate alternative
fueled vehicles, and/or low emission vehicles
in public agency fleets. Encourage the use of
appropriate alternative fueled vehicles, and/or
low emission vehicles in private fleets.
Climate Change Impacts. Encourage all levels
of government to share information to prepare
for climate change impacts.
Coordinated Planning. State policy should
encourage and provide incentive for cities to
coordinate and share planning information
with neighboring cities, counties, and other
governmental entities so that there are agreed
upon regional blueprints and strategies for
dealing with greenhouse gas emissions.
Water Supply for New Development.

Encourage exchange of water supply
information between state and local agencies,
including information on the impacts of
climate change on state and local water
supplies.
Recycled Content and Green Purchasing
Policies. Encourage the adoption and
implementation of recycled content and
green procurement policies, if fitness and
quality are equal, including the adoption of
an Environmental Management System and
authorization of local agencies to consider
criteria other than only cost in awarding
contracts for services.
Environmental Standards. Cal Cities supports
flexibility for state and local governments to
enact environmental and other standards or
mandates that are stronger than the federal
standards. However, Cal Cities reserves
the right to question or oppose stronger
standards on the merits. Cal Cities also opposes
legislation that prohibits state and local
governments from enacting stricter standards.

Cal Cities supports efforts to encourage regional
climate adaptation planning to reduce climate
risk, foster collaboration among local, regional, and
state entities, and develop guidance for potential
state, federal, or private investment in regional
adaptation projects.

Cal Cities believes that statewide climate bonds
should be comprehensive and include funding for
capital infrastructure projects.
8 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Natural Disaster Preparedness
Cal Cities supports local efforts and resources
for local governments to prepare, prevent, and
adapt to wildfires, earthquakes, and other natural
disasters.

Hazardous Materials
Cal Cities supports the ability of local governments
to enact local standards or regulations that are
stronger than those enacted at the state and
federal level. To this end, where the city fire
department is the lead agency for regulating and
enforcing hazardous materials laws, Cal Cities
supports the provisions of existing law that permit
a local fire department to adopt stronger local
requirements, as long as it complies with specified
procedures to enact such stronger local standards.

Cal Cities opposes legislation or regulations that
restrict such authority.

Cal Cities supports efforts to streamline and
coordinate hazardous materials regulation among
various levels of government, including city fire
and county environmental health departments.

Cal Cities supports the ability of city fire
departments to be administrating agencies for
any of the major hazardous materials laws or to
be the lead agency (the Certified Unified Program
Agency) under the SB 1082 program and opposes
legislation or regulations to restrict such authority.

Cal Cities opposes any efforts to restrict the ability
of cities to issue building or other permits it is now
authorized to issue relative to hazardous materials
laws.

Cal Cities opposes any proposals that would
preempt the ability of a city to deny a land use
permit or restrict its ability to issue a conditional
use permit for the siting of a hazardous waste
facility.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that mandates that
cities post information on the Internet regarding
adoption, amendment, or repeal of hazardous
materials ordinances. However, Cal Cities does
not object to legislation that makes such posting
voluntary.

Cal Cities supports the following principles related
to Brownfields Revitalization:
Cal Cities supports state and federal legislation
that would create additional fiscal resources
and options to restore and develop urban
and industrial brownfields contaminated by
hazardous materials. Cal Cities also supports
creative state and federal efforts to encourage
revitalization and better use of abandoned
urban and industrial brownfields, as long as
local governments retain existing land use
authority.
Cities should have the ultimate say on whether
a proposed brownfield remediation project
is consistent with local land use policy. The
proposed use of a project (i.e., parking garage,
business park, residential development) should
be consistent with a city’s general plan and
land use authority.
The clean-up level of a project should be based
on its proposed use (i.e., parking garage, as
opposed to residential development).
Mechanisms, such as restrictive covenants of
deed restrictions, need to be in place to ensure
that if a future use for a property is different
than that which was proposed when the site
was cleaned up, that the clean-up levels be
re-evaluated and additional remediation be
required before the new use can be approved.
Local agencies do not have the desire or
generally the expertise to do the technical
evaluation for site assessment and remediation
plans. Appropriate state agencies should have
that responsibility.
If a property owner plans to develop the site,
then the owner should be required to do the
necessary site assessment and clean up.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 9

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Solid Waste and Recycling
Cal Cities supports continued efforts by local
agencies to meet the 25% and 50% recycling
and diversion provisions of the Integrated
Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) and
believes that decisions on how to achieve those
requirements are best determined at the local
level, rather than by state agencies. Cal Cities
believes that those jurisdictions that have made a
good faith effort to comply with the requirements
of AB 939 should not be subject to enforcement
penalties. Cal Cities opposes the repeal of AB 939,
but supports continued efforts to streamline its
provisions and to assist in compliance.

Cal Cities believes that green waste used as
alternative daily cover (ADC) should be eligible
for limited AB 939 credit, as long as the ADC
meets performance and health and safety criteria
established by the California Integrated Waste
Management Board (CIWMB), now the California
Department of Resources, Recovery & Recycling
(Cal Recycle).

Cal Cities continues to support legislation
to provide changes to AB 939 (the California
Integrated Waste Management Act) that will:
Place more emphasis on implementation
of waste diversion programs and less strict
mathematical accounting;
Require Cal Recycle to evaluate the level of
accuracy of the existing system the board uses
to measure jurisdictions’ achievement of the
waste diversion requirements of state law and
develop appropriate policies, in consultation
with local jurisdictions, to account for any
inaccuracies in the system;
Encourage the development of non-burn
transformation technologies by providing full
diversion credit for the waste that jurisdictions
send to non-burn transformation facilities;
Require the board to expand its market
development activities, including providing
more funding for research and development of
markets for recyclable materials; and
Require Cal Recycle to staff its existing
regional offices with personnel that can assist
jurisdictions in carrying out the requirements
of the act.

Cal Cities supports legislation and other efforts
to increase the markets for recycled materials,
including advance disposal fees, minimum
content laws, and recycling market development
zones. Cal Cities opposes legislation that requires
local governments to adopt refuse fees based
upon variable can rates.

Cal Cities supports efforts to strengthen curbside
recycling programs and opposes efforts to weaken
such programs. Cal Cities supports legislation to
expand the container types included in the AB
2020-bottle bill program.

Cal Cities supports the right of cities under existing
law to be designated as Local Enforcement
Agencies for solid waste facility permitting,
inspection and enforcement, and opposes
legislation to restrict this authority or transfer it to state agencies.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would preempt
local land use authority over solid waste facilities,
would restrict the ability of a city to issue a land
use permit for a solid waste facility or would
restrict the ability of a city to condition such
facilities through the conditional use permit
process.

Cal Cities does not oppose legislation that assesses
fees on solid waste that is disposed of out of state,
as long as the fees reflect the pro-rata portion of
in-state costs.
10 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cal Cities opposes legislation that would authorize
the Director of Cal Recycle to consider landfill
capacity as a reason for denying concurrence
of a solid waste facility permit and also opposes
legislation that would prohibit a public agency
from being certified as a Local Enforcement
Agency if the public agency is also an operator of a
solid waste facility.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would
authorize the Director of Cal Recycle to consider
environmental justice as a basis for concurring or
denying a solid waste facility permit. Cal Cities has
adopted the policy that issues of environmental
justice are best addressed at the local level
through the local land use and public hearing
process and through existing federal and state
policy.

While Cal Cities supports the retrofit of public
and private diesel-fueled garbage trucks to
reduce particulate matter air pollution (see Air
Quality section), Cal Cities opposes funding such
retrofits in a way that would either interfere with
the existing franchise relationship between local
governments and haulers or would impose a
surcharge on landfills.

Cal Cities supports legislation and regulation
that authorizes the land application of biosolids
that meet specified statewide health and safety
standards. Cal Cities supports legislation that
permits enactment of stronger local ordinances
only if they are based upon protecting public
health and safety and good science. Cal Cities
opposes legislation that preempts outright
stronger local ordinances, regardless if they are
based on protecting public health and safety and
good science.

Electronic Waste
Cal Cities supports legislation implementing
the concept of manufacturer responsibility for
electronic waste (e-waste). This includes, but is not
limited to, encouraging or providing incentives
for e-waste recycling, requiring manufacturers of
computer, cathode-ray tube (CRT), photovoltaic
modules (solar panels), and other electronic
products considered universal wastes, to operate
or fund comprehensive, extended producer
responsibility programs. Such programs should
require products to be sustainably designed and
labeled, offer financial incentives to consumers to
properly dispose e-wastes, encourage recycling,
reuse and collection programs by manufacturers,
incentives to consumers to redeem or recycle
e-waste, and fund a convenient collection
infrastructure.

Cal Cities supports statewide and manufacturer
education programs to educate consumers about
e-waste and recycling efforts.

Cal Cities supports an advance disposal fee on
computer and other electronic products in order
to fund such manufacturer responsibility programs
and local collection and recycling programs.

Cal Cities supports national efforts to address the
e-waste problem.

Household Hazardous Waste
Cal Cities opposes legislation that requires local
jurisdictions to collect household hazardous
waste in a specific collection manner, including
mandatory curbside collection.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
Cal Cities supports legislation implementing
producer responsibility. This includes, but is not
limited to, mandating or providing incentives
including funding for comprehensive producer
responsibility programs for hazardous and
universal wastes and products and packaging for
which disposal or recycling is problematic for local
governments.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 11

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Single-Use Plastics
Cal Cities supports reducing the amount of
single-use plastic packaging and products that
enter the waste stream through methods such as
source reduction and increases to the recyclability
and composability of these items. This includes
reducing the waste generated from single-use
plastics, such as plastic straws.

Single-Use Carryout Bags: Cal Cities supports
in concept legislation that charges a fee for all
consumers for single-use carryout bags at the
point of sale; however, Cal Cities does not have a
position on the amount of the fee except that is
should be set to modify consumer behavior.

Cities should be eligible for moneys generated
from any fee placed upon single-use carryout
bags, provided those dollars are used by the city
to mitigate the effects of single-use carryout bags
on the stormwater, solid waste diversion, visitor
education and awareness, and water quality in
the city. Any application for funding provided to
cities by single-use carryout bag fees should be
streamlined, simple, and not overly burdensome.

Cal Cities supports CEQA exemptions for singleuse carryout bag bans or a programmatic EIR.

Cal Cities opposes any bill that would preempt
local governments from individually banning
or placing a fee on single-use carryout bags
distributed within the city.

Energy and Utilities
Cal Cities supports the constitutional right
of municipal utilities to operate outside the
jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities
Commission (PUC) and opposes any legislation
that would erode the ability of municipal utilities to
operate, or place them under PUC control.

Cal Cities supports maintaining the standard of
inverse condemnation for investor-owned utilities
that require utilities to pay damages. Cal Cities
opposes reducing the inverse condemnation
standard for incidents caused by a utility, whether
retroactive or otherwise, and supports ensuring
local governments can recover applicable
damages.

Cal Cities supports the prohibition of passing
through the costs of fines and penalties incurred
by electrical and gas corporations to ratepayers.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that dictates the mix
of generating sources (i.e., hydro, coal, biomass,
wind, etc.) used by municipal utilities.

Cal Cities opposes any legislation that interferes
with local utility rate-setting authority and opposes
any legislation that restricts the ability of a city to transfer revenue from a utility (or other enterprise
activity) to the city’s general fund.

Cal Cities is neutral on legislation requiring
municipal electric utilities to include a “renewable
portfolio standard” (RPS) in their mix of sources
of electricity, as long as the requirement is the
same as that which applies to investor-owned
utilities. Cal Cities opposes legislation that requires municipal electric utilities to meet an RPS that
is stronger than that applied to investor-owned
utilities.

The following principles will guide Cal Cities’
position regarding exit fees to avoid cost shifting
for newly formed municipal utilities or extensions
of existing municipal utilities:
A mechanism or venue other than the PUC
should be used to determine and impose the
exit fees in order to prevent PUC jurisdiction
over municipal utilities. For example, exit fees
might be best evaluated and incorporated
by the courts as part of eminent domain and
the condemnation proceeding used when a
city wishes to take over the IOU’s distribution
system.
Cal Cities does not object to fair exit fees to
avoid cost-shifting for customers that were
actually served by an investor-owned utility.
12 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Exit fees should consist of payments of a fair
share of the DWR bond costs, a fair portion of
the IOU under collections and a fair share of
the remaining amount of the CTC (competition
transition charge, left over from AB 1890).
Exit fees should not be charged to newly
annexed municipal utility territory that
was never served by an IOU (so-called
“greenfields”).
In addition, Cal Cities believes photovoltaic
systems should be completely exempt from
any type of exit fee.

Cal Cities supports efforts to reduce the number
and frequency of utility-initiated power shutoffs,
also called public safety power shutoffs, to
maintain city electricity grid integrity and city
operations.

Cal Cities encourages transparency regarding
the energy consumption of data centers to help
cities appropriately site these facilities and to avoid impacts on grid reliability and operations, while
balancing opportunities for economic growth and
technological advancements. Cal Cities supports
the adoption of energy efficiency standards for
data centers and the prevention of any cost shifts
onto other electricity customers.

Cal Cities supports state investments in clean
energy infrastructure that improve energy
reliability, support cities with project siting,
permitting and development, and advance
California’s clean energy goals. Funding should
benefit priority for clean energy investment
in disadvantaged communities and be
complimented with technical assistance to
support local implementation efforts.

Cal Cities supports transparency and
accountability measures that require state energy
agencies to annually report to the Legislature
on their planning efforts and energy priorities,
including research, efficiency standards, demand
forecasts, siting and planning efforts, and
implementation challenges preventing the state
from meeting its clean energy goals.

Cal Cities supports policies that evaluate and
encourage the use of curtailed solar and wind
generation to produce hydrogen as a renewable
energy resource and other renewable energy
resources.

Community Choice Aggregation
Local Energy Autonomy: Cal Cities supports
programs that increase local control over the
purchase and development of renewable energy
resources, as an effective means of increasing
consumer access to renewable energy at stable,
competitive rates, and decreasing statewide
greenhouse gas emissions.

Cal Cities supports cities’ exercise of the right
to form or join existing Community Choice
Aggregation (CCA) entities, as an effective method
of increasing local control over power supply.

Accordingly, Cal Cities supports legislation and
regulatory policies that support CCA autonomy in
policymaking and decision-making, and opposes
legislation and regulatory policies that unfairly
disadvantage CCAs or CCA customers, or reduce
or undermine local decision-making autonomy by
the CCA or its governing board.

Cal Cities supports continuing development of
local renewable energy resources and supply,
including the protection of local autonomy to
administer energy efficiency and install and utilize
integrated distributed energy resources.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 13

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Consumer Protection: Cal Cities supports
complete transparency of all energy procurement
practices, stranded costs, and departing load
charges. Cal Cities supports fair competition in
statewide energy markets for CCAs and municipal
or other publicly owned utilities. Cal Cities supports
legislation and regulatory policies that protect
CCA customers from improper cost allocation. Cal
Cities opposes legislation that conflicts with or
diminishes CCA procurement autonomy.

Energy Efficiency: Cal Cities supports effective
leveraging of energy efficiency programs tailored
to address local needs and concerns.

Microgrids
Cal Cities supports the use and deployment of
microgrids, especially as a tool to aid energy
resiliency and disaster preparedness.

Electric Industry Restructuring
Cal Cities supports the restructuring of the
electricity services industry, provided it meets the
following criteria:
Support the Concept. Cal Cities of California
Cities supports the concept of electric industry
restructuring if it results in lower electricity
rates that continue permanently into the
future. Cal Cities does not support or oppose
any specific form of restructuring and believes
the program ultimately implemented must
satisfactorily address the adopted criteria listed
below. Any new industry restructure should
be based on a thorough economic analysis
of the full costs and potential benefits of the
alternatives under consideration.
Equitable Benefits. Any restructuring
program should result in all ratepayers directly
sharing in the benefits equitably.
Municipal Utilities. Any restructuring program
should maintain the concept of municipal
utilities. No restructuring proposal should
abridge the existing authority of municipal
utilities to operate or abridge the ability of
cities to form municipal utilities in the future.
Franchise Authority. Cities should continue to
have the authority to issue franchises and any
program should be at least revenue neutralrelative to revenue currently received from franchises.
Aggregation. Under any restructuring
program agreed upon by the PUC or the
Legislature, cities should have the opportunity
to become aggregators for municipal
operations or the community at large. As an
aggregator, a city would be able to combine
the electric loads of various users and
negotiate the purchase of electricity for those
users.
Stranded Investments. The problem of
stranded investments should be resolved in
a way that keeps investors, ratepayers, and
generators financially whole. Any policy to
deal with stranded investments for large
energy producers (i.e., nuclear power) should
be applicable to all other producers (i.e.,
independent power producers).
Wheeling. Any program should facilitate the
wheeling of electricity between generators and
users.
Alternative Sources. Consistent with existing
Cal Cities policy that supports the development
of alternative energy sources, any restructuring
program should incorporate support for
alternative energy in order to enhance the
mix of energy sources available in California,
both for environmental and strategic energy
security reasons.
14 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Biomass. The unique problems of the biomass
industry, as they relate to California’s solid
waste infrastructure, should be fairly resolved
in any deregulation program.
Social and Environmental Impacts.

Consistent with existing Cal Cities
policy, California should not abandon its
energy programs that provide social and
environmental benefits.

In addition to those policy guidelines, Cal Cities
agrees that cities that are aggregators should
be required to follow the same consumer
protection standards as other aggregators, that
participation in aggregation by an electricity user
should be voluntary, and that cities should have
the opportunity to serve as aggregators for their
municipal operations or for those residential or
commercial customers who wish to participate in
a city-sponsored aggregation program.

Finally, Cal Cities believes that any federal action
in the area of electricity restructuring must
not preempt legislation and actions in states
that choose to restructure their utility industry
if such federal action relates to state and local
government home rule authority. This includes
authority related to the regulation of rights-ofway, franchises, taxing utilities and services, or to aggregate.

In response to the energy crisis of 2001, Cal Cities
adopted the following principles related to energy:
Land Use Control. Local control over land
use should be inviolate. Cal Cities will oppose
legislation that restricts local land use control
beyond that which is already in existing law.
Municipal Utilities. The autonomy of
municipal utilities should not be eroded. Cal
Cities will oppose any legislation that harms
municipal utilities.
Energy Prices and Rates. Cal Cities is
concerned about the impacts of escalating
energy prices on the overall economic health
of our state, including city budgets. Although
at this time Cal Cities will not get involved in
individual bills dealing with technical aspects
of pricing, Cal Cities believes that any solution
to address the short- and long-term energy
price situation should meet several key criteria.
» Cal Cities believes energy prices should
encourage conservation and reward those
who reduce energy use (i.e., tiered rates).
» Cal Cities is concerned about the impacts
of escalating energy prices on low-income
residents and small businesses. Cal Cities
supports energy pricing structures and
other mechanisms to soften the impacts on
this segment of our community.
» In designing rates, the state should be
aware of the operational constraints of
some businesses and thus their potential
inability to take advantage of conservation
pricing. Thus, the state should provide
other incentives to conserve to businesses
that cannot take advantage of other
options.
Conservation in City Facilities. Support
legislation that provides direct funding for
conservation and demand reduction projects
in city facilities.
» Work to obtain the greatest level of funding
for local governments, and work with all
authors and the Administration in crafting
legislation that will be most effective and
beneficial to local governments.
Siting Energy Facilities– Incentives to Local
Governments. Funding should be available
to cities to streamline the siting process at the
local level.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 15

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
» Eligible projects to receive incentive
payments would not only cover new
electricity generating facilities, but also
projects to expand existing generation
facilities, to replace them with more
efficient facilities, or to build renewable
projects, including photovoltaics, fuel cells,
or cogeneration.
» In order to stimulate the development
of these facilities, it will be necessary to
provide additional long-term community
benefits that the local government can
demonstrate to its citizens.
» Any city or county that approves siting of
a privately developed generating facility
should receive 100% of the property tax of
that facility. To stimulate the development
of projects such as cogeneration facilities,
the standby charges for the facility should
be waived.
» The state should provide additional
financial assistance to cities and counties
for such projects, which could include the
cost of transmission line extension.
» Cal Cities will work to ensure that there are
no negative impacts on municipal utilities
from efforts to streamline energy facility
siting.
Power Plant Siting – Other Issues. Support
legislation that increases the threshold at
which a city is the lead permitting agency
for an energy facility from 50 to 100 MW (or
above). Oppose legislation that decreases this
threshold.
» Take no position on proposals to streamline
the facility approval process, except to
suggest appropriate revisions to reflect
technical comments from city experts on
local government review and commentrelated provisions. » Explore exempting cities with municipal
utilities completely from the Energy
Commission review process for all power
plants proposed within their jurisdiction,
regardless of the size of the facility (i.e.,
the municipal utility city would have lead
agency authority, regardless of the size of
the facility).
Environmental Regulation of Power Plants.

Cal Cities should not get directly involved in
legislative discussions and should not take
a position on legislation to relax, suspend,
or eliminate environmental regulation, with
several exceptions.
» If environmental standards are relaxed,
suspended, or eliminated, Cal Cities should
seek legislation to ensure that cities do not
bear the burden of meeting the shortfall
in environmental protection. For example,
suspended or reduced waste discharge
requirements for a power plant may result
in increased hot or salty cooling water
discharged from a power plant into a bay
or stream. Publicly owned treatment works
should not be required to meet a higher
discharge level to offset the power plant
discharge or fined as an indirect result of
the increased water pollution that would
result. Similar arguments can be made
for air pollution burdens. There should be
some sunset included for environmental
waivers for re-powering of existing facilities
and all new plants should be required
to meet the BACT (best available control
technology) standard.
Public Power Options. Support all bills that
enhance the public power options available to
cities and counties.
» Condition support and/or sponsorship
upon the correct language being written.

Work with municipal utilities and others to
ensure the provisions are drafted properly.
16 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
» Cal Cities should not support legislation
that would give up the existing, limited
authority of cities to regulate cable and
telecommunications companies as a tradeoff to make it easier to form a municipal electric utility.
Interruptible Rates. Cal Cities should take no
position on legislation dealing with changes
to interruptible rates, but should watch the
subject carefully.
» Cal Cities should comment on legislation,
as appropriate, to express concern that
resolution of the issue should seek equity
in how it handles classes of ratepayers and
communities. Legislation should take into
consideration economic gains previously
made by customers on interruptible rates
and should provide assistance for those
caught in extreme situations.
Rotating Outages – Exemptions. Cal Cities
should not get directly involved in bills dealing
with which type of customers are exempt
from rotating block outages and should not
take a position on these bills. However, Cal
Cities should work with police and fire chiefs
to ensure that police and fire facilities are
appropriately protected either legislatively or
administratively, if proposals move ahead to
expand the range of exempted facilities.
» Cal Cities should seek legislative or
administrative resolution giving advance
notification to those businesses, such as
some agricultural businesses, that use
hazardous materials that could pose
a danger if the plant is not shut down
properly.
» Cal Cities should seek grant or loan funding
for essential services (i.e., police/fire, water/
waste water) to purchase new or replace
existing backup generators that are more
energy-efficient and less polluting.
Wholesale Regional Price Caps – Federal
Legislation. Cal Cities should not take a
position on federal legislation to give the
Secretary of Energy authority to impose
regional wholesale price caps on electricity.

This is a mixed bag and Cal Cities should stay
out of the issue.
Price Gouging by Electricity Suppliers. Cal
Cities should send a letter to the Governor and
Attorney General supporting their ongoing
efforts to determine whether wholesale market
abuse occurred and asking that appropriate
action be taken to remedy the problem if
illegal activity occurred.

California Environmental Protection Act
(CEQA)
Procedures and Notices
Fair Argument Test. Cal Cities strongly opposes
the elimination of the fair argument test as the
threshold for determining whether to prepare an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR). There are a
number of other reforms that will reduce CEQA’s
complexity while preserving the fair argument
test’s role as a planning tool. These include funding
for Master EIRs and eliminating attorneys fees for
petitioners.

Master EIR Funding. Cal Cities strongly supports
the development of a funding source for Master
EIRs. Both of the proposals contained in the Little
Hoover Commission report would meet the needs
of cities.

Exemption for Modified Project Renewals.

Cal Cities opposes exempting the renewal
or reissuance of a permit, license, or other
entitlement where there is a change in the project.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 17

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Centralized Responsible Agency Notification.

Cal Cities opposes shifting the responsibility to
notify responsible agencies from the lead agency
to the State Clearing House. Cal Cities opposes
making identification of Responsible Agencies
at the Notice of Preparation stage by other than
the Lead Agency (e.g., the Office of Planning
and Research) conclusive so that agencies not
identified would be barred from later commenting
on projects.

Responsible Agency Documentation. Cal Cities
supports requiring that Responsible Agency
comments be supported by specific referenced
documentation.

Substitution of Environmental Impact
Statements. Cal Cities opposes allowing
an Environmental Impact Statement to be
substituted for an Environmental Impact Report
in any situation other than military base closures
because the National Environmental Policy Act
does not contain CEQA’s duty to mitigate.

Duty to Respond to Comments. Cal Cities
opposes shielding lead agencies from responding
to comments received more than 30 days after a
Notice of Preparation (NOP) or received verbally.

Timelines for CEQA Contracts. Cal Cities
supports eliminating subdivision (b) of Public
Resources Code Section 21151.5, which mandates
the timeline for entering into CEQA contracts.

Arbitration of Disputes. Cal Cities supports
adding an arbitration option to the requirement
that each county over 200,000 designate a
“CEQA judge.” Among the issues that will need
further refinement are whether an alternative
dispute resolution process should be a condition
precedent to litigation, whether the alternative
dispute resolution process would be binding
on participants, and how to limit the alternative
dispute resolution process to CEQA adequacy
issues rather than community mitigation issues.

Good Faith Settlements. Cal Cities supports
discouraging lawsuits that have little merit by (1)
eliminating the application of a multiplier analysis
to the amount of attorneys fees awarded in a
lawsuit that is subject to a settlement agreement;
and (2) by precluding the adoption of measures
or project conditions as part of a settlement
agreement that do not mitigate a significant effect
on the environment.

Recirculation Standards. Cal Cities supports
raising the threshold for recirculation of EIRs so
that only new “significant unavoidable impacts”
would necessitate recirculation.

Basis for Statements of Overriding
Considerations. Cal Cities supports clarifying
that the basis for Statements of Overriding
Considerations is information contained in the
record.

Compliance with Local Public Notice
Requirements. Cal Cities supports legislation
to require all projects proposed by state or local
public agencies, including universities, community
colleges, schools, counties, cities, and special
districts, to comply with the identical local public
notice requirements that would be applicable to
projects sponsored by private developers in the
jurisdiction where the project is located.

Tolling Agreements. Cal Cities supports tolling
agreements, but acknowledges and relies on
existing published case law that already allows for
the use of tolling agreements in CEQA cases.
18 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Concurrent Preparation of Administrative
Record. Cal Cities opposes legislation that
would require concurrent preparation of the
administrative record and the electronic posting
of administrative record unless (1) the full costs
of concurrent preparation and electronic posting
as determined by the lead agency are paid for by
the applicant or other member of the public who
requests these processes; and (2) a lead agency
that is unable to comply with such a request,
because of either lack of personnel or lack of
technological capability is not required to provide
these processes.

Court Remedies. Cal Cities supports legislation
that would clarify a court’s ability to fashion a
remedy that is specific to the project and limited
to only those aspects of the project held invalid
under CEQA.

Definition of a Project
Effect on the Environment. Cal Cities supports
narrowing the definition of “project” to prevent
CEQA lawsuits on non-environmental matters.

School Operations Exemption. Cal Cities
supports exempting any school closure or student
transfers from CEQA.

Categorical Exemption for Nonindustrial
Infill Projects. Cal Cities supports expanding
categorical exemptions to include development
projects in urbanized areas that are consistent
with general plans, zoning and cumulative impact
projections analyzed in a Master EIR. Such projects
should be limited infill and nonindustrial.

Cal Cities supports legislation that exempts
public works projects, within the existing rightof-way, from CEQA if approved by the city in which the project takes place.

Significant Environmental Effect
Significance Thresholds. Cal Cities opposes the
creation of a new mandate requiring each city
to develop boilerplate significance thresholds.

Cal Cities also opposes a single statewide set of
standards for determining significance at the local
level. Instead, Cal Cities supports requiring that
each EIR contain significance thresholds formally
adopted by the lead agency for the project.

Safe Harbor. Cal Cities supports the concept
of “safe harbor”, which means that if a project
complies with certain locally adopted standards,
then a project could not be challenged in court
based upon those impacts on the environment.

Aesthetics. Cal Cities opposes any effort to limit
a local agency’s ability to challenge the aesthetic
impact of a project under CEQA.

Consideration of Socio-Economic Factors.

Cal Cities opposes adding social, economic,
recreational or other factors to be considered
when analyzing the significance of environmental
impacts.

Indirect Effects. Cal Cities opposes amending the
definition of effects to eliminate the analysis of
indirect and cumulative environmental effects.

Cumulative Effects. Cal Cities supports the
elimination of EIRs for projects with solely
cumulatively significant impacts where the impact
has been addressed by a comprehensive plan that
identifies specific mitigation measures. Cal Cities
opposes exempting projects that are subject to
their own subsequent environmental review from
consideration as a reasonably foreseeable future
project when analyzing cumulative impacts.

Statement of Overriding Considerations. Cal
Cities supports transparency in CEQA decisionmaking but opposes a public comment period for the notice of draft Statement of Overriding
Considerations.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 19
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES
Alternatives
Alternative Site Requirement. Cal Cities supports
eliminating the alternative site requirement for all
private projects.

Level of Detail. Cal Cities supports requiring
that projects of statewide, regional or area-wide
significance describe at least two feasible project
alternatives with a level of detail equal to the
proposed project.

No Project Alternative. Cal Cities opposes the
elimination of the “no project alternative.”
Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Cal Cities
opposes the elimination of the fair argument
test as the threshold for determining whether to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

Cal Cities strongly supports the development of a
funding source for Master EIRs. Cal Cities supports
adding an arbitration option to the requirement
that each county over 200,000 population
designate a “CEQA judge.”
Streamlining
Cal Cities supports expanding the definition of
“emergency” under CEQA to include projects that
mitigate a high threat to life and property as a
result of a catastrophic wildfire.

Coastal Issues
Cal Cities opposes legislation that would permit
the state to impose conditions on Local Coastal
Plans developed by cities and counties.

Cal Cities supports efforts to curb frivolous appeals
to local coastal decisions.

Cal Cities supports prohibiting the expansion of
offshore oil and natural gas production along the
California coast.

Cal Cities supports the Federal Coastal Protection
Act, which prohibits additional offshore
development through the year 2002. This position
was based, in part, on concern about the impacts
to on-shore support facilities and services by
offshore development activities.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that grants authority
to the Coastal Commission that is inconsistent,
duplicative and overlapping with the authority of
other regulatory agencies, such as regional water
quality control boards or other agencies, or that
grants the Coastal Commission authority outside
the coastal zone.

Cal Cities affirms its commitment to local control
by requesting the Coastal Commission to defer
to the elected officials of a city with respect to
choices in the implementation of a Local Coastal
Plan that complies with the requirements of state
law and regulation.

Cal Cities supports additional resources and tools
to help cities plan for and address sea level rise.

This includes efforts to better coordinate with
the California Coastal Commission and Ocean
Protection Council to combat sea level rise.

Miscellaneous
Mitigation Monitoring Program. Cal Cities
supports efforts to ensure compliance with
Mitigation Monitoring Programs but opposes
any effort to require local agencies to report on
compliance or add other procedures regarding
the implementation of Mitigation Monitoring
Programs.

Cal Cities supports the right of cities to serve as
lead agencies for the purposes of the Surface
Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA).
20 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Consistent with the policy adopted by the
National League of Cities, Cal Cities believes the
appropriate venue for addressing the issue of
“regulatory takings” is within the evolving judicial
interpretations of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S.

Constitution.
Cal Cities opposes any federal or state
regulation, statute, or constitutional
amendment which would place restrictions
on federal, state, and local government actions
regulating private property or requiring
additional compensation beyond the
continually evolving judicial interpretation of
the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Cal Cities will oppose any legislation that
includes such a provision, regardless of what
else is included in the legislation (i.e., legislation
that designates a listing of an endangered
species as a “regulatory taking”).

Cal Cities supports the ability of local governments
to voluntarily develop and approve species habitat
plans for their communities, in conjunction
with willing property owners. Cal Cities opposes
requiring local governments to amend their
general plans to include species habitat plans
developed by others but not approved by the
local government.

Cal Cities supports legislation that imposes
“Sinclair”- type fees on products in order to
fund the cost of prevention or mitigation of the
pollution or environmental and health impacts of
such products. Cal Cities opposes legislation that
would restrict the imposition of such fees at the
state or local levels.

Cal Cities supports partnering with the Legislature
and the Governor to address the devastating
environmental impacts of illegal marijuana
grows on both private and public lands and the
associated threats to public safety. Cal Cities
supports the creation of responsive solutions with
adequate funding support and effective State and
federal government leadership to address this
widespread problem.

Cal Cities supports the careful development of
forest waste biomass utilization programs to align
environmentally responsible forest management
and climate adaptation efforts that do not create a
net increase in emissions of greenhouse gases or
toxic air contaminants.

LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
California Water Guidelines
FEBRUARY 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. California Water: General Principles....................................................................................20 II. Water Conservation.........................................................................................................................21 III. Water Recycling................................................................................................................................22 IV. Water Quality......................................................................................................................................22 V. Areas of Origin...................................................................................................................................25 VI. Water Storage....................................................................................................................................25 VII. Conveyance Systems.....................................................................................................................25 VIII. Flood Management .......................................................................................................................27 IX. Groundwater.......................................................................................................................................28 X. Fish And Wildlife ..............................................................................................................................28 XI. Drainage................................................................................................................................................29 XII. Recreation ............................................................................................................................................29 XIII. New Technology...............................................................................................................................29 XIV. Financial Considerations ............................................................................................................30 XV. Appendix A: Water Quality Improvement Initiative (2008).................................30 XVI. Appendix B: Glossary.....................................................................................................................32 NOTE: The League of California Cities most recently updated and revised the California Water Guidelines in 2010. The effort began in 2008 with the formation of the Water Task Force, which was comprised of members from Cal Cities 16 Regional Divisions and all interested city officials. After months of meetings and conference calls, the Water Task Force submitted the California Water Guidelines revisions to the Board of Directors. Upon formal adoption by the Board, the California Water Guidelines where incorporated in the Environmental Quality Policy Committee’s scope of responsibility. For additional information, please see the California Water Guidelines introduction on the following page. 22 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Introduction
The California Water Guidelines were first
adopted by the League of California Cities
(Cal Cities) in 1988. Cal Cities and the County
Supervisors Association of California (CSAC)
developed the guidelines. Together, at the time,
the two organizations represented 58 counties and
449 cities.

Much has changed in the realm of water policy
in the more than 20 years that have passed since
the Guidelines were first adopted. The number of
counties has remained at 58, but California has
gained an additional 31 cities and the population
of the state has increased to more than 38 million
people, creating increased demands on water
supply. There is growing recognition that there are
better ways of managing the flow of water within
California’s many watersheds and through the
Delta, to prevent harmful environmental impacts
while still ensuring a reliable supply of water to
its citizens. Climate change is seen as having an
increasingly important impact on water supply
and water quality. Water shortages place renewed
emphasis on the importance of water reclamation,
water recycling, and other means of nurturing and
protecting an essential resource.

In 2003, Cal Cities Board created Cal Cities Water
Quality Task Force to identify and evaluate
wastewater and stormwater regulatory issues of
concern to cities and to recommend steps that
Cal Cities should take to address those concerns.

The Task Force drafted new Cal Cities policy on
water quality and the Cal Cities Board of Directors
adopted their report on July 18, 2003.

In 2008, Cal Cities formed a new Water Task Force
to consider updates and revisions to the Water
Guidelines Cal Cities drafted and adopted 20 years
earlier. Cal Cities 16 Regional Divisions designated
voting members; but membership on the Task
Force was open to all interested city officials, and
meetings were open to all interested parties.

The Task Force first met in Sacramento in April
2009 and organized three working groups (Water
Use, Water Supply, and Water Discharges).

Members of the working groups held numerous
meetings by conference call over the next two
months. Subsequent meetings of the full Task
Force were held in June and September 2009
before the revised Guidelines were submitted to
Cal Cities policy committees in January 2010, for
review and approval. The Guidelines were formally
approved by the Cal Cities Board of Directors in
February 2010.

The California Water Guidelines are designed to be
used by policymakers at all levels of government
in developing future water policy for the state of
California. Cal Cities encourages city, county, and
state officials, as well as representatives from other
organizations, to review the guidelines as water
policies and programs are developed.

I. CALIFORNIA WATER: GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

1. Water needs are projected to increase
significantly in the future. While water is
a renewable resource, it is also a finite one.

2. Cal Cities supports the development
of additional groundwater and surface
water storage, including proposed surface
storage projects now under study if they
are determined to be feasible, including,
but not limited to, environmentally,
economically, and geographically relating
to point of origin. Appropriate funding
sources could include, but are not limited
to, user fees, bonds, and federal funding.

3. Local, state, and federal agencies
should prepare plans for short-term
water emergencies as well as long-term
cooperative water management plans
and policies, such as the Integrated
Regional Water Management Plan
(IRWMP) process.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 23
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES

4. All water development projects must
be economically, environmentally, and
scientifically sound.

5. Critical California water issues cannot
be solved without the cooperation of
the state and federal governments.

Communication and cooperation among
policy groups with emphasis on finding
statewide consensus is supported.

6. Adequate water quality requirements for
wastewater discharge into surface water
and groundwater to safeguard public
health and protect beneficial uses should
be supported. Beneficial water quality is
fundamental to the health and welfare of
California and all of its citizens.

7. The long-term viability of rivers and
streams for instream uses such as fishery
habitat, recreation and aesthetics must be
protected.

8. Cal Cities encourages all cities to work
with counties, water agencies, and special
districts to facilitate water conservation,
recycling, and reuse efforts.

9. Cal Cities supports state water policy
that allows undertaking aggressive water
conservation and water use efficiency
while preserving, and not diminishing,
public and constitutional water rights.

10. Cal Cities supports land use as an
important strategy for water supply and
water quality benefits.

II. WATER CONSERVATION

1. Statewide Goal. Cal Cities supports the
development of a statewide goal to
reduce water use by 20% by 2020 through
the implementation of fair and equitable
measures consistent with these principles.

2. Statewide Effort. Accomplishing water
conservation and water use efficiency
goals will require statewide action by
all water users, including residential,
commercial, industrial, and agricultural
water users, local and regional planning
agencies, state and federal agencies,
chambers of commerce, and business,
commercial and industrial professional
and trade associations.

3. Comprehensive Solutions. Water
conservation and water use efficiency
must be part of a comprehensive solution
that includes local resource development
and infrastructure improvements,
including storage and conveyance,
as part of a statewide system that
promotes economic and environmental
sustainability.

4. Monitoring, Reporting, and
Accountability. Cal Cities supports the
implementation of programs to assure
prudent measurement and monitoring of
water use to provide accountability and
transparency toward the accomplishment
of water conservation and water use
efficiency goals.

5. Protect Water Rights. Implementation
of water conservation and water use
efficiency programs must be consistent
with existing state law in that the act
of conservation cannot be allowed to
undermine the water rights of the entities
implementing the water conservation or
water use efficiency program or interfere
with existing water conservation or water
use efficiency projects.

6. One Size Does Not Fit All. Water
conservation and water use efficiency
programs must have the flexibility
to adjust to widely varying local
circumstances recognizing that one size
does not fit all. Cal Cities encourages
each city to develop its own ordinance
outlining its conservation plan.
24 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES

7. Urban Water Conservation and Water
Use Efficiency. In urban areas, Cal Cities
advocates for the implementation of
residential and commercial retrofit
programs, innovative pricing strategies,
water-efficient landscaping, including
the implementation of urban Best
Management Practices (BMPs).

Cal Cities encourages cities to consider the
Ahwahnee Water Principles for ResourceEfficient Land Use when making future land use decisions. (http://www.lgc.org/about/
ahwahnee/h2o-principles/)

8. Agricultural Water Use Efficiency. In
agricultural areas, Cal Cities advocates for
incentive-based programs.

III. WATER RECYCLING

1. Wherever feasible, water recycling
should be practiced in urban, industrial,
and agricultural sectors. This includes
increasing the use of recycled water over
2002 levels by at least one million acrefeet/year (afy) by 2020 and by at least two million afy by 2030.

2. Potable water should include as much
use of reclaimed water and water
conservation by 2030 as possible.

3. Increased recycling, reuse, and other
refinements in water management
practices should be included in all water
supply programs.

IV. WATER QUALITY

1. General
a) Cal Cities supports the development
of objectives and standards to assure
high-quality water throughout
California. Surface and groundwater
should be protected from
contamination.
b) Cal Cities supports efforts to provide
safe and affordable drinking water
across the state. However, Cal Cities
opposes imposing a tax on water as a
funding mechanism.
c) Cal Cities supports the development
of economic protocols and guidelines
to assist local governments and water
boards in determining reasonably
achievable, cost-effective, and
environmentally sound regulations.
d) Cal Cities supports the ability of cities
to enact discharge and water quality
requirements or standards that are
stricter than state or federal standards
and opposes efforts to restrict such
authority.
e) When addressing contamination in
a water body, water boards should
place priority emphasis on cleanup strategies targeting sources of pollution, rather than in-stream or endof-pipe treatment. f) Cal Cities encourages water boards
to address cross-media pollution of
water including, but not limited to, the
problems of atmospheric deposition of
water pollutants.
g) Cal Cities encourages all state offices,
departments, and boards to comply
with state policy for water quality
control, including compliance with the
Basin Plans.
h) Cal Cities encourages Federal and
State Governments to ensure proper
funding to the U.S-Mexico Border
Water Infrastructure Program to
address issues related to cross-border
pollution.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 25
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES

2. Water Board Reforms
a) Cal Cities generally supports the
concept of water board reform.
b) Any water board reforms should
recognize the inherent differences
between cities and regions in
California.
c) Water board reform should recognize
the symbiotic relationship between
regional water quality control boards
and local governments.
d) Cal Cities supports the retention
of designated local government
representatives on the regional boards
and the inclusion of a designated local
government representative on the
State Water Board.
e) Cal Cities supports streamlining the
board process, including delegating
permit authority to the executive
officers, with rights of appeal, and
giving greater authority to the State
Water Board over regional board
policies and decisions.

3. Basin Plan Updates
a) Cal Cities supports the option of local
agencies developing funding for basin
plan updates.
b) Cal Cities supports comprehensive
updates to the basin plans that
recognize the unique and varied
nature of stormwater. Basin plans
need to recognize the unique and
varied nature of stormwater, both wet
weather and dry weather runoff.
c) Basin plan updates should comply
with the Porter-Cologne requirements
to recognize economic impacts, local
drainage conditions, and scientific
consensus, including source control
and atmospheric deposition strategies.

4. National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permits
a) Cal Cities supports reform of the State’s
Water Board’s administration of the
federal NPDES program.
b) Cal Cities encourages the water boards
to issue permits that are reasonably
achievable, based on the unique
conditions of a city or region.
c) Cal Cities supports regulations and
legislation that promotes watershed
management, that appropriately
spreads the responsibility for clean
water beyond the requirements that
apply to point-source dischargers,
municipal storm drain systems and
publicly-owned treatment works.
d) Cal Cities generally opposes legislation
that requires the use of numeric limits
in waste discharge permits, especially
in stormwater permits, because of the
difficulties in meeting them, problems
with exceeding them, and the cost and
potential enforcement impacts.
e) Cal Cities supports the development
of a standard definition of “maximum
extent practicable.”

5. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
a) Cal Cities supports the development of
reasonably achievable, environmentally
sound, and cost-effective TMDL’s based
on monitoring and sound science and
addressing local water conditions.
b) Although Cal Cities is supportive of
local agency development of TMDL
funding, greater emphasis needs to
be given to state and federal funding
of the TMDL program, including
providing increased funding to local
government for implementation.
26 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
c) Cal Cities supports the implementation
of TMDLs through alternatives to the
NPDES permits, consistent with the
Clean Water Act and policy, such as
Memorandums of Agreement between
local governments and the water
boards.

6. Water Quality Recommended
Legislation/Policies
a) Ex-Parte Communication. Cal Cities
supports public access to decisionmakers, including during the time that new proposed permits and
permit terms are being proposed.

Cal Cities also supports access to
pending permitees outside of the
administrative process.
b) Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP).

Cal Cities supports legislation to define
MEP.
c) Safe Harbor. Cal Cities supports
legislation that provides immunity
from fines or third-party litigation for a
local government that is in compliance
with the maximum extent practicable
iterative best management practices
d) Mandatory Minimum Penalty (MMP).

Cal Cities supports legislation to
modify the MMP provision of the
existing law to make them fair and
equitable for local governments.

This would include eliminating the
provisions relied upon to compound
penalties for single violations and
providing economic hardship
exemption for small cities (50,000 in
population or less) where there have
been no significant adverse impacts
on the public or the environment from
the alleged violation.
e) Economic Analysis. Cal Cities supports
legislation to develop economic
protocols and guidelines to assist local
government and the water boards in
determining reasonably achievable,
cost-effective, and environmentally
sound regulations, as outlined in
Porter-Cologne Sections 13000 and
13241.
f) Basin Plans. Cal Cities supports
legislation allowing local agencies
to participate in funding basin plan
updates.
g) Water Softeners. Cal Cities supports
the right for cities to enact ordinances
that restrict the use of water softeners.
h) Local Discharge Prohibitions. Cal Cities
supports legislation that would enable
cities to adopt ordinances that limit or
regulate industrial discharges into local
sewers and storm drains, based on
limits in municipal discharge permits.

7. General Water Quality Guidelines
a) Protection and maintenance of
objectives and standards to assure
high-quality water throughout
California is essential. Beneficial uses
of surface and groundwater should be
protected from contamination, even
when treatment methods are available
to meet drinking water standards.
b) Local, state, and federal governments
and the private sector should provide
for the safe management of hazardous
materials, including mining leachates,
to avoid pollution and degradation of
both surface water and groundwater.
c) Adequate research funding to
determine appropriate public health
standards for water should be
supported.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 27
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES
d) Additional research and education in
the application and use of herbicides
and pesticides and alternatives to their
usage as well as research to reduce
industrial and household hazardous
wastes should be supported.
e) The importance of water quality of
bays, estuaries, groundwater, and
other bodies of water important to
municipalities, including the problem
of saltwater intrusion, should be
recognized.

V. AREAS OF ORIGIN

1. Ultimate reasonable and beneficial
water needs of all areas of origin should
be assured. State law should continue
to provide that only water surplus to
the reasonable and beneficial needs of
the areas of origin may be exported. Cal
Cities supports preserving the principle
of protecting the water rights of areas of
origin.

2. Areas of origin protections should apply to
all water sources, including groundwater.

3. Reasonable and beneficial water needs
of the areas of origin should include
instream needs or uses, including
recreation and sediment flushing.

4. Areas of origin should be afforded
financial assistance, such as the DavisGrunsky type bonds, in developing new water facilities.

5. Projects that export water from areas of
origin should not increase the cost of new
local water development projects.

6. Those features of new projects that are
required by state and/or federal agencies
to enhance area of origin recreation, fish,
wildlife, and water quality should be the
financial responsibility of the state and/or
federal government.

7. New policies and programs should not
undermine or alter the water rights of
the entities implementing the policies or
programs.

VI. WATER STORAGE

1. Cal Cities believes that California needs
to develop additional water storage and
therefore believes that the construction
and retention of economically feasible
and environmentally sound flood control,
storage and multi-use projects that will
meet present and future needs should be
supported.

2. The development of additional surface
facilities and the use of groundwater
basins to store surface water that is
surplus to that needed to maintain State
Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB)
Bay-Delta estuary water quality standards
should be supported.

3. Cal Cities encourages project developers
to mitigate the negative impacts of water
storage projects on fishery and wildlife
resources, adjacent lands, water quality,
and recreation.

VII. CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS

1. Statewide
a) Conveyance facilities including, but
not limited to, the Sacramento River,
whether man-made or natural, should
be constructed and/or operated
to minimize seepage and erosion
problems and, where practicable, to
restore or maintain river functions and
to protect previously existing riparian
habitats. They should be constructed
to mitigate these problems and other
adverse impacts on adjacent lands.
b) The owner or purveyor of the water
conveyance system should be
responsible for correcting adverse
28 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
impacts, i.e., erosion, seepage, and
sediment problems upon waterways,
either anthropogenic or natural.
c) Environmentally-sound methods of
erosion-control should be encouraged
along river banks to protect adjacent
lands from flood or other erosive flows
provided any adverse impacts on fish
and wildlife habitats are mitigated.
d) Local distribution systems should
be interconnected with regional
systems, where feasible, to assist in
maximizing the use of local ground
and surface waters during droughts
and emergencies.
e) Solving the water quality, levee
stability, and fishery problems in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is a
primary step in developing any plan to
meet the state’s water needs.
f) Cal Cities acknowledges that the use of
the Sacramento River as a conveyance
system presents problems of erosion
and seepage which must be addressed
in the operation of existing projects
and the design of future projects.

2. Delta
a) Conveyance of water across the Delta
should be through existing channels
wherever possible. Delta transfer
system improvements should be
constructed and operated so as to
minimize or, if possible, eliminate
reverse flows in the lower San Joaquin
River.
b) Construction of Delta transfer
facilities should not proceed until the
Department of Fish and Game and
the Department of Water Resources
have entered into an agreement to
implement measures to offset the
State Water Project’s impacts on the
Delta fisheries and other ecological
concerns in the Bay-Delta estuary,
which are shown to be adversely
affected by the proposed transfer
facilities.
c) Implementation of an integrated
program of rehabilitation and
maintenance of Delta levees involving
federal, state, local, and user interests
for the purposes of protecting the
islands, waterways and other features
including, but not limited to, highways,
railways, water conduits, natural gas
storage, etc., should be supported.

Costs and responsibilities should be
fairly allocated among beneficiaries of
such a program.
d) Until an integrated Delta levee
program is initiated, the Delta levee
maintenance program, (by former
California Sen. Howard Way), California
Water Code Sections 12980-12991,
should be funded and implemented.
e) Any Delta governance and/or water
management structure should include
local government representation from
the Delta region.
f) When assessing conveyance projects,
Cal Cities encourages cities to consider
the guidelines outlined in other areas
of this document.
g) Protection, as well as enhancement
where practicable, of Delta water
quality, while providing adequate
future supplies for all segments of the
state, should be required.
h) Standards balancing the protection
of all beneficial uses of Bay-Delta
waters, including water flowing into
or exported from the Delta, must be
adopted by the SWRCB and enforced
CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 29
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES
to protect the environmental health of
the Bay-Delta system. Pollution from
point and non-point sources into the
Bay and Delta shall be controlled as
stringently as practicable.
i) Programs and facilities to assure safe
drinking water for importing regions
dependent on the Delta should be
supported.
j) The SWRCB should assure continued
monitoring for contaminants in the
Delta.

VIII. FLOOD MANAGEMENT

1. Cal Cities believes that our citizens have a
reasonable expectation that their federal,
state, and local governments will work to
protect them from flooding.

2. Cal Cities believes that flood protection
and management is a statewide issue,
involving flood infrastructure issues
related to levees, urban/suburban/rural
creeks, streams and rivers, and alluvial
fans.

3. Cal Cities believes that it is important
to recognize that levee failures in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta have
water quality, water supply, and economic
impacts that may have statewide effects
beyond the local or regional levee break
situation.

4. Flood control issues require cooperative
planning, evaluation, and solutions
that utilize a regional and statewide
perspective, such as the state IRWMP
process.

5. In assessing problems and proposing
solutions, it is important to consider the
differences between infill development
and new, greenfield development.

6. The public safety and health of California
citizens and the economic health of
California communities and our state
depend upon good flood protection.

This includes the potentially devastating
impacts of floods on homes and
businesses.

7. Cal Cities supports efforts to improve
communication, cooperation, and bettercoordinated planning between different government agencies involved in flood
management. Cal Cities believes that
there must be a genuine partnership
between state and local agencies in
addressing flood control issues.

8. Cal Cities believes cities must ask the right
questions and have the means to obtain
accurate information prior to approving
development in floodplains. This involves
educating elected officials and staff
about whether their city is located in
a floodplain, the local flood control
infrastructure, the agencies that are
responsible for providing flood protection,
the status of levees and other structures
that provide flood protection, emergency
response, and evacuation protocols, and
how their city would be impacted by
flooding.

9. Cal Cities believes that city officials should
understand that a 100-year flood zone
does not mean a low, once-in-100-years
risk of flooding. The designation actually
means that there is a 1% chance of
flooding in any given year. This translates
to a 26% chance of flooding over the life of
a typical 30-year mortgage.

10. Cal Cities supports a 200-year flood
standard for cities in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin and Central Valleys.

11. Cal Cities generally endorses the
recommendations of the state’s Flood
Control Task Force, especially those
recommendations involved in updating
30 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
the CEQA Checklist and General Plan
Guidelines and building codes.

12.The state, Army Corps of Engineers
(ACOE), and Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) should
work collaboratively with state and local
governments regarding flood issues.

IX. GROUNDWATER

1. The SWRCB, through the regulatory
process of its regional boards, should
ensure the highest possible quality and
safety of groundwater by preventing
contamination from point and non-point
sources, especially for usable water.

2. Local drilling, sealing and abandonment
ordinances for water supply and
monitoring wells for the protection of
groundwater and public health should be
supported.

3. The principle that local entities within
groundwater basins (i.e., cities, counties,
special districts, and the regional
water quality control boards) working
cooperatively should be responsible
for and involved in developing and
implementing basin-wide groundwater,
basin management plans should be
supported. The plans should include,
but not be limited to: a) protecting
groundwater quality; b) identifying
means to correct groundwater
overdraft; c) implementing better
irrigation techniques; d) increasing
water reclamation and reuse; and e)
refining water conservation and other
management practices.

4. An active state and federal role in cleaning
up contaminated groundwater basins
should be supported.

5. State and federal involvement, if
requested, in developing groundwater
management plans should include
technical assistance for defining the
characteristics of groundwater resources.

6. Financial assistance from state and
federal governments should be made
available to requesting local agencies
to develop and implement their
groundwater management plans.

7. Planned, joint use of surface and
groundwater and the development
of incentives for such conjunctive use
for increased efficiency should be
encouraged.

8. Early development of a cost-sharing
formula among all beneficiaries to fund
groundwater replenishment projects
should be supported.

9. The importation of additional
supplemental water, consistent with
Section VI Conveyance Systems, as one
means of eliminating groundwater
overdraft in the critically overdrafted
basins should be supported.

X. FISH AND WILDLIFE

1. Protection, maintenance, and restoration
of fish and wildlife habitats, resources,
and their beneficial uses, including
recreational and commercial uses,
should be supported. Where feasible,
enhancement of fish and wildlife habitats
should be provided.

2. Water projects shall mitigate adverse
impacts on fish and wildlife resources.

Mitigation measures shall be onsite, if feasible; otherwise, as close as practicable to the area of adverse
impact. Where practicable, such projects
should incorporate programs designed
to eliminate unnecessary barriers or
impediments to fish migration, stabilize
areas of streambank erosion, increase
CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 31
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES
spawning and rearing habitat for fish, and
maintain riparian vegetation for cover and
temperature control.

3. Protection and restoration of documented
fish habitats should be supported.

XI. DRAINAGE

1. Agricultural Drainage
a) Finding long-term, economically
feasible, and environmentally
sustainable solutions to agricultural
drainage problems is essential and in
the public interest. Solutions must be
safe and environmentally acceptable in
order to protect:
» Viability of agricultural lands;
» Rivers, estuaries, and groundwater
from potential degradation from
agricultural drainage; and
» Water quality for public
consumption. Drainage of
agricultural lands must be part
of current and future agricultural
water project planning and
implementation.
b) Both state and federal funding
should be provided to investigate: a)
further improvement in irrigation and
drainage management ‘practices and
conservation; b) evaporation ponds; c)
deep-well injection; and d) desalination
and other treatment technologies.

An equitable cost-sharing formula for
implementing solutions to existing and
future drainage problems shall include
state and federal governments and
irrigation project beneficiaries.

3. Other (Run-Off)
a) Finding safe and environmentally
acceptable solutions to problems
caused by run-off from non-point
sources is essential and in the public
interest.
b) Similarly, finding safe and
environmentally acceptable solutions
to other drainage and run-off
problems, such as those caused by
mining, dairying, and forest practices,
is essential and in the public interest.
c) Equitable cost-sharing among
appropriate public and private bodies
for implementing solutions to urban
and other run-off problems should
occur.

XII. RECREATION

1. Water development projects should
minimize adverse impacts to existing
recreational uses and provide new
recreational opportunities where feasible.

2. The state and federal governments and
the recreational users should bear the
recreational development costs of water
projects.

3. Operation and maintenance costs
of recreational facilities developed in
conjunction with water projects should be
provided from on-site user fees and other
applicable sources. Other costs incurred
as a result of these recreational activities,
such as law enforcement and emergency
rescue, should receive appropriate
assistance from state and federal sources.

XIII. NEW TECHNOLOGY
Development of new technology in water use,
reuse, desalination, detoxification, and so forth
is encouraged. This should be primarily funded
by the federal and state governments. Publicprivate partnerships in this research also should be encouraged. A high priority should be given to
the protection of public health. New technology
should be evaluated based on sound science.
32 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
XIV. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

1. It is recognized that:
a) The development and operation of
water supply, water conveyance, flood
control and stormwater management,
water storage, and wastewater
treatment facilities is frequently
beyond the capability of local areas to
finance;
b) Since most facilities have widespread
benefits, it has become traditional for
federal, state, and local governments to
share their costs; and
c) It is necessary that such sharing
be continued and that different
institutional arrangements including
cost-sharing formulas among
all beneficiaries, public-private
partnerships, and user fees should be
explored.
d) The requiring agency (whether it be
state, federal, or otherwise) should pay
for the features of projects or programs
that are required by that agency.
e) Cal Cities supports legislation to
provide funding for stormwater,
water, and wastewater programs,
including a constitutional amendment
or legislation which would place
stormwater fees in the category
of water and wastewater fees for
the purposes of Proposition 218
compliance.
f) Any agency that regulates water with
regard to local governments needs to
be involved in the appropriate city with
regard to how the city will pay for the
new regulatory burden imposed by the
agency.

Appendix A
State Water Resources Control Board Water
Quality Improvement Initiative (2008)

1. Water Quality Improvement Initiative Item
#1 (WQI 1): Cal Cities supports applying the
10% rule “One Per Region Basis”

2. WQI 2: Cal Cities supports staggering the
regional water board terms

3. WQI 3: Cal Cities has no recommendation
on reducing the size of the regional water
board from nine members to seven, with
the exception that at least one person
on the regional board should have local
government experience.

4. WQI 4: Cal Cities supports delegating
permitting authority to the regional water
board executive officer and that the
executive officer should take his or her
direction from the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB).

5. WQI 5: Cal Cities is opposed to regional
water board’s having full-time chairs.

6. WQI 6: Cal Cities is opposed to the
creation of a statewide council of fulltime regional water board chairs. (Note:

Water Discharge Subcommittee members
believe that it may be helpful to combine
a number of regional boards into larger
regional boards to address areas that
are similar (e.g., Los Angeles and Orange
County). A large regional board could
bring more consistency to basin plan
management. Any inconsistencies
between the regional boards should be
addressed by the state Board.)

7. WQI 7: Cal Cities supports the
implementation of biennial priority
setting based on the Strategic Plan, with
six-month updates by the regional water
boards.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 33
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES

8. WQI 8: Cal Cities is opposed to allowing the
SWRCB to make the TMDL environmental
process subject to NEPA instead of CEQA.

9. WQI 9: Cal Cities supports requiring a
TMDL to be affirmatively approved by the
State Water Board or upon petition.

10. WQI 10: Cal Cities supports requiring the
regional water board to consider costs of
TMDL compliance.

11. WQI 11: Cal Cities supports authorizing
the SWRCB to make changes to TMDLs,
rather than remanding these decisions
back to the regional water boards (Note:

Subcommittee members believe that this
policy should be tied into WQI#9).

12. WQI 12: Cal Cities has no position on
confirmation of regional water board
conflict of interest rules with the Political
Reform Act – (Note: the Subcommittee
asked for a legal opinion. The question is:
“What are the current conflict of interest
rules pursuant to AB 1234?” Staff and
members believe that this provision is
similar to what already exists for other
state boards [example: Waste Board].)

13. WQI 13: Cal Cities has no position on
the establishment of civil penalties for
fraudulent information with regard to
reporting by permitees.

14. WQI 14: Cal Cities is generally opposed
to any removal of notice and hearing
requirements prior to the SWRCB referring
a case to the State Attorney General for
additional action.

15. WQI 15: Cal Cities has no recommendation
on the additional authorization of district
and city attorneys to pursue civil violations
(for cities over 750,000 in population).

16. WQI 16: Cal Cities believes the state should
limit the number of mandatory minimum
penalties (MMP) to one violation, and the
population limit to qualify under the MMP
law as a small, disadvantaged community
for a single missing report should move
from 10,0000 to 50,000 (in accordance
with federal law).

17. WQI 17: Cal Cities has no recommendation
on early payment of MMP violations.

18. WQI 18: Cal Cities supports the enhanced
ability of the Regional Water Boards
to administratively enforce state
Underground Storage Tank (UST)
Requirements.

19. WQI 19: Cal Cities supports enhanced
oversight of UST testers.

20. WQI 20: Cal Cities supports moving the
SWRCB Enforcement Report deadline to
July 1.

21. WQI 21: Cal Cities supports the SWRCB
developing and implementing
performance measures

22. WQI 22: Cal Cities supports improved data
management systems for the SWRCB.

23. WQI 23: Cal Cities generally has no
recommendation on the standardization
of NPDES permits and believes that this
issue should be worked out with the
individual regional water boards.

24. WQI 24: Cal Cities generally has no
recommendation regarding the update of
SWRCB Strategic Plan.

25. WQI 25: Cal Cities supports SWRCB
conducted training of regional water
boards, provided the SWRCB both
conducts the training and sets consistent
standards statewide.
34 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Appendix B

GLOSSARY
Affordable: A word used increasingly to
express concern whether recipients of water
will be able to meet the cost. Whether people
view water as affordable will depend on many
factors.
Agricultural Drainage: Usually refers to
installed drains to permit removal of water
which accumulates within a plant root zone.

May be essential to maintain a favorable
salt balance for plant growth. May contain
selenium, salinity, pesticides, herbicides, etc.
Area and County of Origin Protections:

Refers to legislative provisions for protecting
water rights of these areas.
Area of Origin Law: Applies to a watershed
or area wherein water originates, or an area
immediately adjacent thereto which can be
conveniently supplied with water therefrom.

Because this law was enacted as part of the
Central Valley Project Act, it applies to the
Sacramento River watershed. The Burns-Porter
Act subsequently defined the SacramentoSan Joaquin Delta to be part of the watershed of the Sacramento River. Gives area of origin
preferential rights regarding operation of
federal Central Valley Project and to contract
for State Water Project water and to certain
rights to construct projects or make diversions,
provided use is reasonable and beneficial.
(California Water Code Sections 11128, 11460-
11463).
County of Origin Law: Prohibits State Water
Resources Control Board from the assignment
of rights which will deprive a county in which
the water originates of such water necessary
for the development of the county. (California
Water Code Section 10505).
Delta Protection Act: Establishes that an
adequate supply of water in the Delta is
necessary to the peace, health, safety, and
welfare of the people of the state, except that
delivery of such water is subject to County
of Origin and Area of Origin laws. (California
Water Code Sections 12200-12220).
California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and
Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act: Establish
certain rivers or sections of rivers to be
preserved in their free-flowing condition. The
California law (California Public Resources Code
Sections 5093.50-5093.65) allows domestic
water diversion for residents of counties
through which the river flows, provided there
is no adverse effect upon the free-flowing
character of the river. California law finds
that the free-flowing state of such rivers is
a reasonable and beneficial use within the
meaning of the state constitution.
Atmospheric Deposition: The transfer of
pollutants suspended in the air to the earth’s
surface. Pollutants move directly from the
atmosphere into water bodies through
precipitation, falling particles, or the absorption
of gases into water. They also may be deposited
over land and transported to water bodies via
runoff. Atmospheric deposition is believed to
be a significant source of various pollutants to
many water bodies.
Basin Plan: The Regional Water Quality
Control Plan adopted by a regional water
quality control board for that board’s area of
responsibility in California. (See Cal. Water
Code Section 13240). The basin plan establishes
water quality standards, uses, and other criteria
for surface and ground waters.
Best Management Practices (BMPs):

Methods, measures, or practices designed and
selected to reduce or eliminate the discharge
of pollutants to surface waters from point
and nonpoint source discharges, including
urban runoff. BMPs include structural and
CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 35
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES
nonstructural controls, and operation and
maintenance procedures, which can be
applied before, during, and/or after pollutionproducing activities. California Toxics Rule (CTR): A federal rule
adopted by the U.S. EPA on May 19, 2000, which
established numeric criteria for various priority
pollutants for California. The rule can be found
at 65 Federal Register 31682-31719, and was
codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at
40 CFR 131.38.
Characteristics of Groundwater Resource:

Include quality, quantity, rate of renewal, and
yield.
Clean Water Act (CWA): A comprehensive
water quality statute (33 USC 1241 et seq.). The
CWA was first adopted by Congress in 1972 and
later amended in 1987 to apply to stormwater/
urban runoff. The CWA was designed to restore
and maintain the chemical, physical, and
biological integrity of the nation’s waters to
support “the protection and propagation of
fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and
on the water.”
Coliform: A group of related bacteria that
are generally benign to humans. They are
natural and common inhabitants of the soil
and ambient waters (e.g., lakes, rivers, and
estuaries), as well as the gastrointestinal tracts
of animals.
Compensation: Full replacement for
unavoidable fish and wildlife resource losses
in terms of habitat area and long-term
renewability of the quality and quantity of
such resources. In the interest of clarification,
compensation does not mean monetary
payment as a substitute for replacement of
resources losses.’
Conjunctive Use of Surface and
Groundwater: Planned joint use of surface and
groundwater. This usually involves maximizing
the use of surface water in wet years (with
minimum groundwater pumping) and
using any surplus surface water to recharge
groundwater, and in dry years augmenting
surface supplies by drawing on the stored
groundwater.
Conservation: Fish and wildlife resource loss
prevention, mitigation, and compensation.
Conservation (of Water): Means efficient use
of water. Also means reducing water losses or
eliminating waste; storing water for water use;
preserving water quality.
Contamination: An impairment of the quality
of the waters of the state by waste to a degree
that creates a hazard to the public health
through poisoning or through the spread of
disease. (California Water Code Section 13050)
(See “Pollution”).
Contamination Sources:
» Point Discharge: Source is identifiable, as
from a pipe or drain ditch.
» Non-Point Discharge: Sources are more
diffuse and not easily identified with
well-defined outlets; includes runoff from
agricultural or forested land, general
urban runoff, except where collected in
identifiable drains.
» Cross-Media Pollution: The contribution
or “flux” of pollution from one
environmental medium to another. (For
instance, the transfer of pollutants from
the atmosphere to water.)
Davis-Grunskv Bond: This legislation
established a bond fund to facilitate the
financing of projects in counties with limited
financial resources.
Demand/Need: “Demand” usually refers to
a statement of water requirements that may
be projected on the basis of past water use
practices. In contrast, “need” is intended to
refer to water that is truly needed to satisfy a
purpose if water is efficiently utilized.
36 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Delta: Refers to the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta. 700,000 acres of islands, waterways,
levees, and lands into which the natural runoff
flows from the Sacramento, San Joaquin,
Mokelumne, and Consumnes river systems
before either being exported or entering the
San Francisco Bay and then, the Pacific Ocean.
Desalination: A process designed to treat
brackish or seawater to make it useful for
potable or non-potable use.
Enhancement: Development or improvement
of fish and wildlife resource values of the area
affected by a project beyond that which would
occur without the project.
Enterococcus: A non-coliform bacteria group
used as an indicator of the presence of fecal
material in drinking and recreational waters.

USEPA believes that enterococci have a
better correlation with swimming-associated
gastrointestinal illness in both marine and
freshwaters than coliform organisms, and “die
off” more slowly in saltwater.
Environmentally Safe: Not a precise technical
term but used to mean actions that have little
or no adverse impact.
Economically Sound/Feasible: Not a precise
technical term, but one that refers to a balance
of costs and benefits. Formerly emphasis
was placed on calculating benefit-cost ratios.

Uncertainties and possible abuses in such
calculations have raised questions concerning
the usefulness of such calculations. Problems
include what types of benefits to involve, as
well as what costs to involve. Many, including
environmentally-related benefits and costs,
cannot be adequately quantified.
Fish and Wildlife Issues: See Compensation,
Conservation, Enhancement, Fish and Wildlife
resources, Instream uses, Loss prevention
measures, Mitigation, Preservation, Protection,
and Restoration.
Fish and Wildlife Resources: Birds, mammals,
fishes, amphibians, reptiles, invertebrate
animals, endangered, threatened or rate native
plants, their habitat area, and all types of
aquatic and land vegetation and other factors
of the environment upon which resources are
dependent. (See Fish and Game Code Section
45 for the definition of fish).
Flood Irrigation: Used to describe what is
more appropriately called basin and border
irrigation in which land prepared as basins or
land bordered by small levees is irrigated with
relatively large streams of water.
Groundwater Management: The process of
controlling the extraction of groundwater and/
or planned recharge to manage the supply
and/or quantity of groundwater. Objectives
of groundwater management may include
minimizing (or preventing) adverse effects
such as groundwater overdraft or quality
degradation. (Also see conjunctive use and
water management practices).
Groundwater Overdraft: Where, over a period
of time, groundwater extraction exceeds
natural or artificial recharge.
Indicator Bacteria: Bacteria that are used
to assess the microbiological quality of water
because, although not typically diseasecausing themselves, they may indicate the presence of several waterborne diseasecausing organisms. The concentration of indicator bacteria is used as a measure of water
safety for body contact and for consumption of
water.
In-stream Uses: Include fish, wildlife,
recreation, aesthetics, hydropower production,
dilution of contamination, waste discharge,
and sediment transport.
Local Entities: Includes cities, counties, water
districts, joint powers, etc.
Loss Prevention Measures: Designing and
implementing measures to avoid immediate
CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 37
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES
and long-term impacts to fish and wildlife
resources.’
Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP): The
vaguely defined standard set forth in the CWA
to be included in Municipal NPDES Permits
to be complied with by municipal dischargers
in order to reduce the discharge of pollutants
from their municipal separate storm sewer
systems. CWA Section 1342 (p)(3)(B)(iii) requires
that permits for discharges from municipal
storm sewers “shall require controls to reduce
the discharge of pollutants to the maximum
extent practicable, including management
practices, control techniques and systems,
design and engineering methods, and such
other provisions as the Administrator or the
State determines appropriate for the control of
such pollutants.”
Mitigation: Measures to lessen or reduce
adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources
through the use of structural and nonstructural loss prevention measures in project design and operations. (See CEQA Guidelines
Section 15370)1 NEPA regulations have a
functionally similar definition. NEPA definition
includes restoration as a mitigation measure,
however.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES): The program for issuing,
modifying, revoking, and reissuing,
terminating, monitoring, and enforcing
wastewater and stormwater discharge permits,
and imposing and enforcing pretreatment
requirements under CWA.
Non-Point Source Discharge: Pollution
caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over
and through the ground. As the water moves,
it picks up and conveys natural and humanmade pollutants, depositing them into water bodies and groundwater. Atmospheric
deposition and hydromodification are also
nonpoint sources of pollution.
Numeric Limits: Numeric or numerically
expressed narrative restrictions on the
quantity, discharge rate, concentration, or
toxicity units of a pollutant or pollutants that
may be discharged from an NPDES permitted
location or outfall.
Pathogens: Disease-causing bacteria, viruses,
and protozoans that are transmitted to people
when they consume contaminated water.
Pollution: An alteration of the quality of
the waters of the state by waste to a degree
which unreasonably affects: (1) such waters
for beneficial uses, or (2) facilities that serve
such beneficial uses. Pollution may include
contamination. (California Water Code Section
13050: Please see “Contamination”).
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
(Porter-Cologne): The California equivalent
of the federal Clean Water Act. This legislation
established that the State Water Resources
Control Board (State Water Board) has the
ultimate authority over state water rights,
water quality policy, and the nine regional
water quality control boards (regional water
boards) which oversee water quality on a dayto-day basis in their geographic regions. Preservation: Maintenance and protection of
fish and wildlife resources at levels that existed
prior to the commencement of a (the current)
project. Preservation is achieved through
mitigation for avoidable resource losses and/or
compensation for unavoidable resource losses
and/or compensation for unavoidable resource
losses. The term “preservation” is synonymous
with “conservation” as used in the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act. Preservation does
not assume that restoration will occur, but it
could.
Project Beneficiaries: Those who gain value
in some fashion from any of the following:
water supply, flood control, power generation,
recreation, salinity repulsion, wildlife.
38 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Protection: Department of Fish and Game
appears to use this term when referring to legal
enforcement by wardens. (See Preservation
and Conservation).
Real Water Savings: Simply means there is an
“actual” savings of water that could be put to
other use.
Reasonable and Beneficial: Depends on the
facts and circumstances of each case. What
is a beneficial use at one time may, because
of changed conditions, become a waste of
water at a later time. (Tulare Irrigation District
v. Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation District). The
courts have determined the law requires an
evaluation of the ascertainable facts in view
of the increasing need for water conservation
within California.
Beneficial uses include: storing water
underground if thereafter to be applied to
beneficial purposes; use of water for recreation
and preservation and enhancement of fish and
wildlife resources.
Reclaimed Water: Wastewater that has
been cleaned so that it can be used for most
purposes except drinking.
Recycled Water: Municipal and/or industrial
wastewater that has been treated to a
sufficiently high level that it can be reused
usually for non-potable purposes such as
irrigating landscape and refilling aquifers.
Restoration: Means to return to “original”
conditions. (Selection or “original” or base
condition is often source of debate.)
Reverse Flows: Where the direction of flow in
a channel is reversed, as in the case of channels
in South Delta which normally drain towards
San Francisco Bay, but where pumping for
export may cause flow reversal, drawing more
saline water further into the Delta.
Sediment Transport: Sediment of various
particle sizes may be carried by moving water.

The size of particles transported by water
increases as velocity rises.
Stormwater: Water that accumulates on land
as a result of storms and can include runoff
from urban areas such as roads and roofs.
Surplus Water: When used as a technical
term in water contracts, this is the water
that is available after entitlement water has
been delivered. The amount of surplus water
varies from year to year, generally according
to amount of runoff. Surplus water ordinarily
is less expensive to the user than entitlement
water. Reference is also made to water which
is surplus to reasonable and beneficial uses of
area of origin and Bay/Delta.
System Expansion: Extension of existing
infrastructure exclusively to serve new
customers in presently unserved areas and/
or increase in water supply exclusively for the
same purpose.
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL): A
calculation of the maximum amount of a
pollutant that an impaired water body can
receive and still meet applicable water quality
standards. A TMDL is to include allocations
for the maximum load a particular source of a
pollutant may discharge to the subject water
body. TMDLs are required pursuant to Section
1313(d) of the CWA for water bodies that have
first been listed as being impaired for the
particular pollutant or pollutants at issue.
Triennial Review: A review of water quality
standards in basin plans that is required at
least once every three years by Section 1313(c)
(1) of the CWA and periodically under Section
13240 of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality
Control Act.
Ultimate: Imprecise meaning. Depends on
time frame.
Usable Groundwater: Refers to groundwater
that can be pumped within the cost and
technical constraints appropriate to the
situation.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 39
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: CALIFORNIA WATER GUIDELINES
Water Banking: Not a precise term. Generally
refers to storing presently surplus water in
groundwater basins or in surface storage
facilities.
Water Management Practices: Relate to the
varied objectives of irrigation, municipal and
industrial use. These objectives may not be
compatible. In general, management practices
are developed to maximize economic returns
and/or to minimize (or prevent) adverse
environmental impacts including water
quality degradation. Conservation of supply,
reuse, treatment for use and waste disposal,
and the planned conjunction use of surface
and groundwater are all aspects of water
management. (Also see Conjunctive use and
Groundwater management).
Water Quality Standards and Objectives:

The regional water quality boards set
“objectives” in their basin planning process
which are equivalent to what EPA calls
“standards.” The “standards” include numerical
narrative criteria and plans to implement these
criteria.
Water Reclamation: Usually refers to
removing contaminants in water so that the
water can be discharged into a receiving water
without creating problems for fish, wildlife,
and other aspects of environment. Also, refers
to water which has been treated to remove
contaminants as required to permit its reuse,
particularly for irrigation of landscaped or
agricultural areas.
Way Bill (Program): Delta Levee Maintenance
Program. Declares the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta, characterized by islands and
meandering waterways, as a unique resource
of major statewide significance. Reasons are
stated. Declares the system of levees is the
key to preserving the physical characteristics
of the Delta. Finds there is an urgent need for
a higher degree of levee maintenance and
rehabilitation throughout the Delta and ‘that
the state has an interest in providing technical
and financial assistance. Establishes that local
agencies maintaining non-project (private)
levees shall be eligible for reimbursement from
the General Fund. Reimbursement shall be at
50% of cost. (California Water Code Sections
12980-12991).
303(d) List of Impaired Waterbodies: The
State is required to prepare a list of water
bodies that are polluted, under Section 303(d)
of the CWA. Inclusion of a water body on the
303(d) list generally leads to the development
of a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for the
water body.

Prepared by Robert M. Hagan, Extension Water Specialist, Marcia Kreith, Program Representative, University of California Cooperative Extension, July 1987 and Ken Farfsing, City Manager, City of Signal Hill, October 2009.

Sources:

Some of the preceding definitions were derived
from the following sources:
» California Wetlands Information System
Website: Porter-Cologne Act
» Los Angeles MS4 Permit: Basin plan, best
management practices, maximum extent
practicable, NPDES permit
» RWA: Cross-media pollution
» Southern California Coastal Waters
Research Project (SCCWRP) Website:

Atmospheric deposition
» State Water Board Website: Numeric Limits,
Triennial Review,
» U.S. EPA Website: California Toxics Rule,
Clean Water Act, coliform, enterococcus,
TMDLs
» U.S. Geological Service (USGS) Website:

Indicator bacteria, pathogens
40 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
Labor Relations
Cal Cities supports legislation that specifically
exempts local public agencies from the
requirement to negotiate with any labor or special
interest group about matters submitted to the
voters of that jurisdiction as initiatives or Charter
amendments.

Cal Cities supports efforts to promote, initiate and
improve both public and private sector labormanagement relations.

Cal Cities opposes any system of compulsory
and binding interest arbitration, including
state mandates and the imposition of binding
arbitration through the initiative process. No
arbitrator board or other private person should
have any control, direct or indirect, over local
budgets, revenues, or appropriations.

Cal Cities opposes any legislative action that
requires the continuation of the terms of any
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between a
public agency and an employee organization until
a successor MOU is agreed upon.

Cal Cities opposes any extension of the State
Public Employment Relations Board jurisdiction
over local public agency labor relations disputes
and charges of unfair labor practices, and also
opposes any interference or intervention in local
collective bargaining by all labor-management
relations councils or boards.

Cal Cities opposes state-mandated legislation
related to employer/employee relations that are
not mutually agreed upon by the local public
agency and its employee organizations, except as
provided by local law.

Public Sector Pensions, Compensation and
Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEBs)
Pension Sustainability Principles
Public compensation systems programs should be
sustainable, fair to taxpayers and employees, and
provide long-term financial stability.

Governance, Transparency,
and Labor Relations

SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The Committee on Governance, Transparency
and Labor Relations (GTLR) reviews state
legislation as it relates to transparency,
technology (open data), healthcare, elections,
and political reform. Additionally, the
committee oversees pension and workers
compensation reform as well as other labor
(employer/employee) related issues.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 41
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND LABOR RELATIONS
Cal Cities believes that solutions towards realizing
pension system sustainability should be the result
of inclusive stakeholder collaboration at both the
local and state level (retirees, employees, employers,
CalPERS).

Cal Cities supports legal or legislative remedies
that facilitate options to restore sustainability to
CalPERS benefit plans. As appropriate to each
city, such actions could include one or more of the
following:
A single benefit level for every employee.
Converting all currently deemed “Classic”
employees to the same provisions (benefits
and employee contributions) currently in place
for “PEPRA” employees for all future years of
service.
Temporary modifications to retiree Cost
of Living Adjustments (COLA) that are
automatically added to a retiree’s pension
benefit payment regardless of compensation
level or CPI.

Cal Cities supports expanded flexibility for cities
regarding their contract agreements with CalPERS,
which could include additional mechanisms
for exiting CalPERS and renegotiating UAL
amortization terms.

Cal Cities supports a change in state law or judicial
precedent to allow employers to negotiate plan
changes with classic CalPERS members.

Cal Cities supports legislative solutions to address
increasing costs associated with Industrial Disability
Retirement (IDR).

General Pension Principles
Cal Cities supports balanced measures that ensure
sustainable retirement and health care benefits are
offered to public agency employees while at the
same time ensuring that public agencies have solid
retirement benefits to attract and retain highly
talented employees. Cal Cities supports locally
negotiated retirement programs that are fiscally
responsible, transparent, sustainable, affordable,
and equitable for employees and for taxpayers in
the long-term.

Cal Cities supports reasonable measures to
ensure that retirement benefits are properly
funded allowing flexibility to local agencies to
negotiate equitable cost-sharing with employees
and smoothing the employers’ costs during
challenging economic times. Cal Cities supports
the long-term sustainability of retiree health
benefits by including their costs in employer/
employee costs sharing formulas.

Cal Cities recognizes and supports the value of
a dependable, sustainable, employer-provided
defined benefit plan for career employees;
supplemented with other employee-only funded
retirement options including personal savings
such as a 457 Plan. Cal Cities supports further
exploration of defined contribution options as part
of future pension reform discussions.

Cal Cities supports pension portability across all
public agencies to sustain a competent cadre of
California public servants.

Cal Cities supports calculating benefits only on
core components; special pays such as temporary
upgrade of out of class pay should be eliminated
from final compensation calculations.

Cal Cities supports meeting any retirement needs
for part-time employees with alternatives to a
defined benefit plan.

Cal Cities supports employee benefits (including,
but not limited to, retirement and disability) and
desires to ensure that income derived from such
sources are non-duplicative.

Cal Cities opposes preemption of charter city
authority over public pension systems.

Cal Cities supports reducing public retirement
benefit fraud and increasing transparency of other
post-employment benefits.
42 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cal Cities supports full participation in the
PERS Coalition (PERS/PAC) and its purpose
of monitoring legislation, policies, and action
necessary to maintain or further the interests of
contracting agencies.

Cal Cities believes that cities with retirement
programs must retain the ability to opt out of
Social Security.

Cal Cities believes that the employee benefit
structure within local government should be
developed locally through the local government
collective bargaining process and that process
should be strictly honored by the state Legislature
and the Governor.

CalPERS (California Public Employees’
Retirement System)
CalPERS Divestments Policy
Divestment in industries that may run contrary
to environmental or other broad policy goals as
an investment strategy can present challenging
conflicts for CalPERS in balancing current affairs
against its fiduciary duty to maximize retirement
investments. Cal Cities supports CalPERS’ priority
to its members as stated in the State Constitution
Article 16, Section 17, “[a] retirement board’s duty
to its participants and their beneficiaries shall take
precedence over any other duty.”
Cal Cities supports responsible investment
strategies that balance the short- and longterm ability of CalPERS to meet its financial commitments to its members.

Any divestment policy must be well-vetted
and must include the opportunity to identify
alternative revenue sources consistent with the
intended impact of the divestment and CalPERS’
fiduciary responsibilities outlined above.

Cal Cities supports CalPERS proxy access efforts to
affect change from within businesses CalPERS has
invested in to ensure they are well managed for
sustained, responsible, long-term success.

Cal Cities supports an exemption for retired
CalPERS employees, allowing them to work for
CalPERS agency under contract or appointment by
the local agency.

Cal Cities supports agencies having the maximum
amount of flexibility when employing and
compensating part-time, seasonal, and temporary
employees (i.e. lifeguards, seasonal maintenance
workers, recreation leaders, summer camp
leaders, and other temporary hires, etc.) to include
eliminating the mandate that CalPERS retirement
benefits must be provided when the part-time,
seasonal, or temporary employee works 1,000 hours
in a fiscal year given the costs associated with the
CalPERS retirement plan.

Further, Cal Cities supports providing CalPERS
with information regarding enrolled members
while eliminating the requirement to provide
information regarding employees who are not
members of CalPERS. Cal Cities also encourages
agencies to support long-term part-time/seasonal
employees by providing proportional retirement
benefits via appropriate mechanisms.

Cal Cities supports having CalPERS provide
a broader range of formula choices classes
with maximum local control and flexibility in
negotiating all options.

Cal Cities supports having CalPERS provide a
broader range of health plan choices with a
variety of benefit options for all types of member
classes with maximum local control and flexibility
in negotiating all benefit options with active
employees and for retirees.

Cal Cities supports legislation that allows agencies
to offer a variety of different health care plans
to retired employees that provides adequate,
affordable coverage.

Cal Cities supports legislation permitting cities to
establish their contributions toward retiree health
premiums through the labor relations negotiating
process, including: (a) multi-tiered contribution
CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 43
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND LABOR RELATIONS
levels; (b) vesting eligibility other than PERS
retirement eligibility; (c) prorated contribution
based on age and/or length of service; and (d)
different contributions for active and retired
employees.

When discussing pension policy, the total cost of
the pension benefit should be considered. In costshare arrangements, Cal Cities supports shared employee/employer costs based on the total cost of
the pension benefit.

Cal Cities supports providing local governments
with maximum flexibility and options. Local
agencies must be able to decide on issues such
as minimum retirement ages, pension caps, costsharing, formulas, and other options to meet local needs and promote ease of administration.

Cal Cities supports giving government agencies
through the collective bargaining process the
option to extend retirement ages for miscellaneous
employees up to social security retirement ages.

Cal Cities supports eliminating the requirement
that any negotiated changes in pension benefits
under the Public Employees’ Retirement Law
(PERL) are voted on twice by the affected
employees.

Cal Cities supports a State Constitutional
Amendment to allow employers to negotiate plan
changes with classic CalPERS members.

Cal Cities supports restructuring the CalPERS
Board of Administration to substantially increase
in independent public members (preferably
with financial expertise) to ensure greater
representation of taxpayer interests with regard to
public pension decisions.

Cal Cities supports setting uniform standards and
definitions for disability benefits and evaluating
the level of benefit that is considered as tax
exempt. The tax-exempt portion should either be
eliminated or allowed on a proportional basis to the
severity of the disability.

If the above reforms prove unfeasible or ineffective,
Cal Cities supports considering a standard public
employee pension system where one benefit level
is offered to every employee as a further option to
restore sustainability to CalPERS.

Cal Cities supports developing a program with the
state to ensure that pension programs offered by
localities are fully transparent and that professional
actuarial evaluations of unfunded components
of other post-retirement benefits (OPEBs) and
pension plans are completed.

Compensation Principles
Employee compensation should be based on each
individual agency’s overall philosophy on employee
compensation as well as the agency’s ability to pay
and provide services to their community. Cal Cities
recognizes that sound compensation practices
are based on the complexity of the job and the
community, as well as the job requirements and
the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to meet
those requirements.

Cal Cities believes that employee compensation
should be based on job requirements, complexity
of both the makeup of the city organization and
community, the leadership needed, labor market
conditions, ethical considerations of what is just
and fair, and the organization’s ability to pay.

Public compensation systems programs should be
sustainable, fair to taxpayers and employees, and
provide long-term financial stability.

Transparency of compensation and other benefits
ensures the public is informed about the fiscal
realities local agencies face as they relate to fiscal
obligations.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would require
employers to pay more than the regular pay for
work on family holidays.
44 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Workers’ Compensation
Cal Cities supports legislation and policy that
controls escalating workers compensation costs to
public agencies and taxpayers.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would permit
an employee to use more than one legal process
in regard to disability claims (i.e., ADA, workers’
compensation, DFEH), or any other erosion of
the “exclusive remedy” principle as it relates
to disability claims covered under workers’
compensation.

Cal Cities supports reforming the workers
compensation process to incentivize employees
returning to work creating a penalty for those
that do not return to available modified duty or
alternate positions.

Other Employer and Employee Related
Issues
Cal Cities supports efforts to conform the California
Family Care Leave Laws to the federal Family and
Medical Leave Act (FMLA) laws.

Cal Cities supports the special protection of
elected officials, county public defenders, public
figures, and public employees acting in their
official capacity against threats of death or serious
bodily injury.

Cal Cities opposes legislation making it a
misdemeanor to disclose peace officer personnel
records and citizen complaint records, as well as
prohibiting the use of documents or information
obtained in violation of this procedure in any
administrative proceeding against a peace officer,
and any measure that makes it more difficult to
discipline the misconduct of police officers.

Cal Cities supports maintaining the confidentiality
of personnel matters and protecting public
safety personnel discipline records from public
disclosure.

Cal Cities opposes the mandated inclusion of
governmental entities for Occupational Safety
and Health Agency (OSHA) violations without
appropriate compensation for the mandates.

Cal Cities supports legislation to protect the
authority of city employers to request that an
applicant disclose information or use for hiring
decisions information concerning a felony
conviction.

Cal Cities supports the establishment of a state
program similar to that of the federal AmeriCorps
program that would allow cities and other local
agencies to host service members.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would allow
employment applicants to bring action against the
agency for taking into consideration their status as
a current or former public employee.

Cal Cities supports controlling the overall costs of
healthcare through community-wide actions.

Cal Cities opposes requiring public agencies to
continue employer contributions for health care
coverage for employees who, during the duration
of a strike, fall below the minimum hours worked
to qualify for employee health care coverage.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would interfere
with a city’s ability to maintain a safe workplace.

Cal Cities is committed to ensuring employees
have access to, and are educated in, sexual
harassment prevention training and supports the
State of California’s production of uniform training
materials to be used to educate employees
on the prevention of sexual harassment in the
workplace. As employees move from agency to
agency or between public and private employers,
it is important that they have a uniform training
standard related to sexual harassment prevention.

Transparency
Public trust and confidence in government are
essential to the vitality of a democratic system and
are the reason ethics laws hold public officials to
high standards.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 45
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND LABOR RELATIONS
Laws alone cannot foresee or prevent all
actions that might diminish the public’s trust in
governmental institutions. Transparency laws
impose the minimum standards of conduct; to
preserve public trust, public officials should aspire
to conduct that exceeds minimum standards.

State revisions to laws governing local agency
transparency and ethics should address material
and documented inadequacies in those laws and
have a reasonable relationship to resolving those
problems.

In order to encourage and facilitate compliance
with new transparency and ethics requirements,
state laws should be internally consistent, avoid
redundancy and be mindful of the practical
challenges associated with implementation.

State officials and agencies should aspire to
conform to the same level of transparency and
ethical behavior as is imposed on local officials and
agencies.

Equity in Governance
Cal Cities believes in conducting the business of
government with transparency, openness, respect,
and civility. The spirit of honest public service is
what builds communities. Open decision-making
that is of the highest ethical standards honors
the public trust. Cal Cities believes state officials
and agencies should conform to the same level of
transparency and ethical behavior as is imposed
on local officials and agencies.

Cal Cities opposes any law or regulation that
applies solely to California cities and local officials, unless such law or regulation also applies equally
to the state of California and state officials. Cal
Cities acknowledges that local government
and state government have their own unique
needs. Specific proposals which treat state and
local government differently should be carefully
reviewed to ensure equity in governance.

Open Meeting Law (Ralph M. Brown Act) &
Open Access to Public Records (California
Public Records Act)
Cal Cities supports legislation that recognizes the
need to conduct the public’s business in public.

To this end, Cal Cities supported and was a cosponsor of the original Ralph M. Brown Act and supports legislation that conforms to the intent
of the Act. Cal Cities also supports the regulation
of the state and other public agencies to ensure
conformance to the principles of the open
meetings provision in the Ralph M. Brown Act.

Cal Cities opposes legislation claiming to enhance
open and public meetings that in practice
unnecessarily complicates the ability of a local
governing body to properly communicate with
the public and that discourages communications
among governing body members through
unproductive restrictions and inappropriate
activities.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would impose
further unnecessary restrictions on the action that
a governing body can take in closed sessions.

Cal Cities supports legislation that recognizes the
realities of other constraints under which a local
governing body must operate that necessitates
judicious use of closed sessions, including:
The privacy rights granted to individuals under
the U.S. and California constitutions.
The personnel issues that have a potential
impact on an individual’s career and potential
earning capacity and that raise serious liability
questions for a local jurisdiction.
The protection of the taxpayer’s interests over
property and other acquisitions by a public
agency.
The proper maintenance of the same attorneyclient privilege enjoyed by the private sector. 46 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cal Cities supports legislation that includes lessthan-a-quorum advisory committees within the definition of “legislative body” as defined in the
Ralph M. Brown Act, if the committee is composed
solely of members of the legislative body whose
subject matter jurisdiction has cumulatively lasted
two years or less.

Cal Cities supports alternative methods of meeting
public notice requirements and enhancing them
through the use of cost-effective, innovative, and
technology-friendly methods of communication.

Political Reform Act of 1974 (PRA)
Cal Cities supports legislation and regulations that
establish sound practices and principles related to
political campaigns. Regulations and legislation
that restrict or preempt local authority will be
opposed.

Cal Cities should continue to explore opportunities
to improve and streamline the Political Reform Act
and its implementation through regulations.

Cal Cities supports an increase in the fee for the
reproduction of statements required under the
Political Reform Act from ten cents ($0.10) per
page to twenty-five cents ($0.25) per page.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would prohibit
the use of public resources to commence an
action to enjoin the operation of any law or
constitutional amendment that was proposed by
initiative petition and approved by the voters.

Cal Cities supports legislation providing the FPPC
with authority to issue opinions to guide local
officials in understanding conflict of interest laws,
including Government Code Section 1090.

Governance and Ethics
Cal Cities supports legislation that strengthens the
ethics laws related to the Board of Administration
(Board) for the California Public Employees’
Retirement System (CalPERS) including banning
the ability of former Board members to do
business with CalPERS.

Cal Cities believes that a statute of limitations
for bribery should not begin until the act is
discovered. Cal Cities also believes that in cases
of conspiracy to commit a felony, the statute of
limitations should be the same as the statute of
limitations for the underlying crime.

Elections
Cal Cities supports legislation that reduces any
unnecessary and costly procedures for conducting
a municipal election. Cal Cities opposes legislation
that mandates costly and unnecessary procedures
related to the election process.

Cal Cities opposes state-mandated consolidated
elections as they lead to increased costs and move
local elections further down on the ballot even
though local outcomes have a direct impact on
voters themselves.

Cal Cities supports providing city councils more
flexibility to fill city council vacancies including
extending the appointment period to fill a vacancy.

Cal Cities supports mail ballot elections.

Cal Cities supports the requirement that the intent
and text of a local ballot measure is to be filed with
the city clerk and published in a newspaper of
general circulation with a filing fee. With regard to
any land use measure, Cal Cities supports allowing
the city council to refer it to the planning agency
for a report on the measure’s effects.

Cal Cities supports legislation that facilitates newly
sworn citizen’s voter registration.

Cal Cities supports permitting elections officials to
administer voter information electronically so long
as such a process remained voluntary to voters.

Cal Cities opposes any legislation or regulation
that would prohibit legal action from being filed
by any person(s) challenging the validity of the
initiative petition or ordinance after the date of the
election.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 47
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND LABOR RELATIONS
Cal Cities supports legislation that puts before
voters the question of whether general law cities
should have the ability to create public campaign
financing programs.

California Voting Rights Act (CVRA)
Cal Cities supports a process that would allow a
city presented with an allegation of a violation of
the California Voter Rights Act (CVRA) to address
the allegation before any person may file a lawsuit
related to the alleged violation.

Cal Cities supports authorizing cities to convert
from an at-large to a by-district election system
using an ordinance process, thus avoiding possible
California Voting Rights (CVRA) lawsuits and costs
associated with gaining voter approval at the
ballot.

Cal Cities supports modifying the California Voting
Rights Act (CVRA) to provide cities more flexibility
to remedy a potential CVRA lawsuit by converting
to a rank-choice voting (RCV) method.

Recall Elections
Cal Cities supports legislation that maintains the
integrity of the recall process.

Cal Cities supports legislation that reduces
the amount of recall abuse while improving,
streamlining, and ensuring that the public has full
knowledge of the issues.

Elected Officials
Cal Cities recognizes that elected and appointed
officials receive threats and have become
the target of violence at their homes. The
unauthorized publication of home addresses
or telephone numbers in newspapers or similar
periodicals, like publications on the Internet, is
a threat to the security of public officials in their
homes. Cal Cities supports legislation to extend
or provide protection to elected and appointed
officials from the unauthorized publication of
their home addresses or telephone numbers in
newspapers or similar periodicals.

Cal Cities supports requiring both elected local
and state officials to maintain their place of
residence in the jurisdiction they were elected to
represent.

Candidates running for elected office with young
children often face the practical reality of paying
for increased childcare to campaign and network
when running for office. Cal Cities supports
increasing diversity of elected officials at all levels and supports the use of campaign funds to pay
for childcare expenses resulting from a candidate
or officeholder engaging in campaign activities or
performing official duties. Cal Cities also supports
legislation to increase flexibility and remove
limitations on how campaign funds may be used
for security expenses.

Legal Issues
Attorney-Client Privilege
Cal Cities recognizes the special role of public
agency attorneys in protecting the public interest,
while at the same time maintaining appropriate
and critical attorney-client confidentiality. The
basis for this position is the belief that it is the
public agency that is the public agency attorney’s
client, not an individual public official. Thus, Cal
Cities supports legislation that permits public
agency attorneys to breach attorney-client
confidentiality to disclose only very serious
wrongdoings where internal corrective measures
have failed or are futile; the disclosure is made to
narrowly circumscribe regulatory agencies and the
public agency attorney follows specific procedures.

Government Liability and Tort Reform
Cal Cities supports legislation that limits the
exposure of local governments to lawsuits related
to liability, including, but not limited to, such
areas as unimproved natural conditions, design
immunity, hazardous recreational activities, and
injuries due to wild animals in public places. Cal
Cities opposes legislation that would unduly
expose cities to increased liability and cost.
48 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Data and Privacy Protection
Cal Cities encourages cities to do everything in
their power to protect the privacy of employees
and constituents. However, Cal Cities opposes
mandates that would require, in the event of a
security data breach, cities to provide identity theft
prevention and mitigation services at no cost to
the impacted persons.

Private Sector Liability
Cal Cities will work closely with private sector
representatives to evaluate the potential for Cal
Cities’ support of civil justice reform measures
designed to improve the business climate in
California. These measures should be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis through Cal Cities’ policy
process.

Cal Cities supports legislation that enables cities
to better prosecute unfair competition cases
(Business and Professions Code 17200) in order
to protect consumers and their residents, and
that removes the 750,000 population and District
Attorney approval for city attorney action in this
area. Cal Cities opposes legislation that restricts
cities from pursuing unfair competition cases
beyond the restrictions in current law (2003).

Interest on Judgments
Cal Cities supports ensuring that pre-and postjudgment interest rates are fair to all parties, including taxpayers, recognizing the impact on
public budgets.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 49

HOUSING, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
Planning And Zoning
General Plans
Cal Cities supports the use of the general plan as
a guide to meeting community planning needs.

A city’s general plan should guide the individual
city’s land use planning and strategic decisionmaking. A city’s general plan should not be subject to mandatory review by regional or state agencies.

General plan requirements should be flexible
and provide guidance to local communities
without requiring inappropriate levels of detail
or mandating new topics or elements. Cal Cities
supports guidance by expert state agencies in
a consultation format but opposes granting
mandatory review, certification, or other approval
authority to another level of government.

Water Supply and Land Use Planning
Cal Cities supports having the best information
available on the reliability of water supplies when
land use decisions are made by local agencies,
while protecting and retaining local land use
decision-making authority.

Zoning
Cal Cities believes local zoning is a primary
function of cities and is an essential component
of home rule. The process of adoption,
implementation, and enforcement of zoning
ordinances should be open and fair to the
public and enhance the responsiveness of local
decision-makers. State policy should leave local
siting and use decisions to the city and not
interfere with local prerogative beyond providing
a constitutionally valid procedure for adopting
local regulations. State agency siting of facilities,
including campuses and office buildings,
should be subject to local notice and hearing
Housing, Community and
Economic Development

SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The principle behind the policies reviewed by
the Committee on Housing, Community and
Economic Development (HCED) is to foster local
control of community planning decisions as they
relate to land use and economic development.

The issues within the purview of the HCED
Committee include general plans and zoning, housing affordability, rent control, subdivision map act, residential care facilities, other land use regulation, development fees including school fee adequacy, annexation and incorporation policy, development agreements, building standards including seismic safety standards, economic development policy including redevelopment and enterprise zones, military base closure and reuse, mobile home regulation, and sign regulation. 50 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Resolve the problems associated with the
distribution of RHNA units within a council of
governments;
Achieve improvements to the housing element
review process;
Develop a neutral dispute resolution process
and fair enforcement alternatives to deal with
disputes over questions of compliance;
Require state laws and policies which
affect housing and land use to be internally
consistent;
Establish additional legal protections to local
agencies that approve affordable housing
and that establish local pro-active affordable
housing policies; and
Authorize communities which achieve
quantifiable affordable housing production
levels to self-certify their housing elements
without being subject to state review.

Housing Finance
Cal Cities supports legislation and state and
federal programs that assist in providing
financing for affordable housing, including the
development of fiscal tools and incentives to assist
local governments in their efforts to encourage
housing and finance the infrastructure to support
housing, as well as establishing an ongoing state
commitment for funding affordable housing.

Cal Cities supports the re-establishment of federal
tax incentives which were in effect prior to 1986
which encouraged private development and
ownership of rental housing.

Cal Cities supports property tax assessment
policies that match local affordable housing
policies.
requirements in order to meet concerns of the
local community. Cal Cities opposes legislation
that seeks to limit local authority over parking
requirements.

Housing Element
Housing issues should be addressed in the general
plan as other planning issues are. The housing
element should be prepared for the benefit of
local governments and should have equal status
with the other elements of the general plan.

The projections of regional and local growth and
the allocations of housing units should account
for state and local planning factors and should be
subject to a formal hearing and appeal process
to ensure that they are realistic. Cities should be
allowed to work together to allocate housing units
among themselves within a subregion. Appeals
should be heard by politically accountable officials
at the state and regional levels. Allocated housing
units are not a production requirement as cities do
not construct housing.

Cities should focus their efforts on facilitating the
production of below market-rate housing units.

Local government efforts should be subject to
realistic performance standards, not to arbitrary
state agency review of the housing element.

Local government housing efforts should be
rewarded by incentives. These incentives should
include streamlining by not being subject to
the Department of Housing and Community
Development review, priority ranking for
discretionary funds, and new discretionary funds
available for general fund purposes.

Cal Cities supports and encourages legislation
that implements comprehensive reforms to the
housing element process that:
Address conflicts between local growth
projections and state regional housing need
numbers;
CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 51

HOUSING, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Economic Development
Job Creation, Retention and Expansion
Cal Cities supports legislation that will provide
tangible and productive tools and incentives to
support job creation and retention in housingrich, jobs-poor communities, such as the awarding of direct grants to fund the development of
infrastructure that results in the creation and
retention of jobs; the elimination of matching
dollar requirements for economic development
and infrastructure state grants; the provision of
grant funding for infrastructure planning and
design and the creation of economic development
strategies; and, allowing cities the maximum
flexibility in the use of state funds toward local
priorities that support job creation. Cal Cities
also encourages the state to adopt policies and
programs that establish a comprehensive solution
to the infrastructure and jobs/housing needs of all
communities within the state.

Eminent Domain
Cal Cities supports enactment of fair eminent
domain reforms that protect homeowners and
opposes proposals that would cripple the ability of
state and local agencies to manage development.

Tenant Protections
Cal Cities supports prohibiting landlords from
discriminating against tenants who use housing
assistance vouchers issued under Section 8 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 and other public
assistance towards their rental payments.

Cal Cities also supports requiring landlords that
seek to increase monthly rent greater than 10% to
provide tenants 90-day notice before the increase
takes effect.

Rent Control
Cal Cities opposes legislation that restricts the
ability of cities to enact rent control ordinances
for mobile homes and stick-built housing
that are tailored to meet local conditions and
circumstances.

Cal Cities opposes legislation that would require
a city to adopt a mobile home rent control
ordinance.

Subdivision Map Act
Cal Cities supports maximizing local control over
subdivisions and public improvement financing.

Discretion over the conditions and length of
subdivision and parcel maps should be retained by
cities.

Density Bonus Law
Cal Cities supports efforts to ensure that the
Density Bonus Law produces meaningful
affordable housing and that local governments
have the flexibility and tools needed to implement
the law in ways that best serve their communities.

Development Fees
Cal Cities supports providing local discretion
in the assessment, collection, and usage of
development fees. The state should provide
infrastructure funding to help local communities
meet California’s growth demands and to increase
housing affordability. Cal Cities opposes limiting
the ability of cities to levy fees to provide for
infrastructure or services.

Cal Cities recognizes that school facilities are a
component of a community’s infrastructure and
must be maintained to foster positive outcomes
for youth and economic development. Cal Cities
supports maintaining city discretion over the
extent to which legislative authority should
be exercised to fully mitigate impacts from
development to the adequacy of school facilities.

Consistent with maintaining discretion, cities
should maintain the ability to condition and deny
projects that the city determines inadequately
mitigate impacts to community schools.

Cal Cities opposes the elimination of any
development fee or tax including excise taxes. Tax
shifts and initiative measures have severely limited
cities’ abilities to provide for community needs.
52 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The state must ensure that cities have adequate
revenues for local infrastructure and services.

Annexation and Incorporation
Cal Cities supports strengthening city control over
urban boundaries. Sphere of Influence law should
be modified to ban county development and to
allow cities to annex logical growth. The Revenue
and Taxation Code should not allow counties to
block annexations in exchange for unreasonable
property tax sharing agreements. In addition,
cities should have expanded authority over
adjacent lands outside of their sphere of influence
regardless of jurisdictional lines so long as the land
is not within another city’s sphere. Cities should
not be required to incur costs for planning to meet
infrastructure needs of unincorporated areas or
leveraged to annex areas which would result in
unfunded costs.

Cal Cities supports facilitating the incorporation of
cities that have met procedural requirements and
voter approval. Cal Cities opposes efforts by the
Legislature to disincorporate a city for any reason,
unless requested by the affected city.

Development Agreements
Cal Cities recognizes voluntary development
agreements as one tool for providing flexibility in
development approvals.

Building Standards
Cal Cities supports flexibility in the adoption and
implementation of health and safety standards
and local reach codes contained in the building
codes. Statutes should maximize local control over
standards applying to local conditions. Cal Cities
opposes new standards imposed by statute rather
than regulation.

Cal Cities opposes attempts to have multiple
state agencies develop specific or subject-related
building standards. New building standards should
be proposed through the California Standards
Commission.

Cal Cities supports authorizing cities to adopt
independent occupancy standards to prevent
overcrowding and associated health and safety
hazards, including fire-related fatalities. Cal
Cities supports cities who voluntarily choose to
implement fire safety measures beyond state
building code. Cal Cities supports city efforts to
adopt local green building codes or reach codes
as tools to advance local sustainability practices to
advance building efficiency and meet the state’s
climate goals.

Military Base Closure and Reuse
Base Closures and Reuse
Cal Cities supports local decision-making over
military base closure and reuse. The affected cities
independently or sub-regionally should work
together toward efficient reuse planning.

Economic Reuse
Cal Cities supports incentives for broad economic
reuse of closed military facilities. Cities should
work on a regional and interstate basis to maintain
economic productivity. Economic reuse includes
both reuse of military facilities and the retooling of
related industries to continue to provide jobs for
residents of California’s cities.

Mobile Home Regulation
Cal Cities supports initiatives that maintain cities
as the enforcement authority for mobile home
regulation.

Cal Cities supports the preservation of existing
mobile home parks as an important source of
affordable housing.

Sign Regulation
Cal Cities supports the authority of cities to
regulate billboards and other signage. Cal Cities
opposes mandatory local abatement programs.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 53

HOUSING, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Principles for Smart Growth
Well-Planned New Growth
Recognize and preserve open space, watersheds,
environmental habitats, and agricultural lands,
while accommodating new growth in compact
forms, in a manner that:
De-emphasizes automobile dependency;
Integrates the new growth into existing
communities;
Creates a diversity of affordable housing near
employment centers; and
Provides job opportunities for people of all
ages and income levels.

Maximize Existing Infrastructure
Accommodate additional growth by first focusing
on the use and reuse of existing urbanized lands
supplied with infrastructure, with an emphasis on
reinvesting in the maintenance and rehabilitation
of existing infrastructure.

Support Vibrant City Centers
Give preference to the redevelopment and reuse of
city centers and existing transportation corridors
by supporting and encouraging:
Mixed-use development;
Housing opportunities for all income levels;
Safe, reliable, and efficient multi-modal
transportation systems; and
Retaining existing businesses and promoting
new business opportunities that produce
quality local jobs.

Coordinated Planning for Regional Impacts
Coordinate planning with neighboring cities,
counties, and other governmental entities so that
there are agreed upon regional strategies and
policies for dealing with the regional impacts of
growth on transportation, housing, schools, air,
water, wastewater, solid waste, natural resources,
agricultural lands, and open space.

Support High-Quality Education and School
Facilities
Develop and maintain high-quality public
education and neighborhood-accessible school
facilities as a critical determinant in:
Making communities attractive to families;
Maintaining a desirable and livable community;
Promoting life-long learning opportunities;
Enhancing economic development; and
Providing a work-force qualified to meet the
full range of job skills required in the future
economy.

Build Strong Communities
Support and embrace the development of
strong families and socially and ethnically diverse
communities, by:
Working to provide a balance of jobs and
housing within the community;
Avoiding the displacement of existing
residents;
Reducing commute times;
Promoting community involvement;
Enhancing public safety; and
Providing and supporting educational,
mentoring, and recreational opportunities.

Emphasize Joint Use of Facilities
Emphasize the joint use of existing compatible
public facilities operated by cities, schools,
counties, and state agencies, and take advantage
of opportunities to form partnerships with private
businesses and nonprofit agencies to maximize
the community benefit of existing public and
private facilities.

Support Entrepreneurial/Creative Efforts
Support local economic development efforts and
endeavors to create new products, services, and
businesses that will expand the wealth and job
opportunities for all social and economic levels.
54 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Encourage Full Community Participation
Foster an open and inclusive community dialogue
and promote alliances and partnerships to meet
community needs.

Establish a Secure Local Revenue Base
Support the establishment of a secure, balanced,
and discretionary local revenue base necessary
to provide the full range of needed services and
quality land use decisions.

Residential Insurance Policy
Cal Cities believes homeowners should be insured
for the value of rebuilding a home to current
building standards. Cal Cities supports measures
to increase transparency in insurance policies so
that homeowners can make informed decisions.

Cal Cities believes residents who have experienced
a wildfire or other natural disaster are entitled
to fair residential property insurance practices
that provide flexibility to rebuild, including that
insured property owners should not lose insurance
coverage during the rebuilding effort.

Cal Cities also believes residential property
insurance policies should not be canceled based
on weather-related claims or immediately
following a disaster.

PUBLIC SAFETY
Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
Fire Services
Cal Cities supports the fire service mission of
saving lives and protecting property through fire
prevention, disaster preparedness, hazardousmaterials mitigation, specialized rescue, etc., as well as cities’ authority and discretion to provide all emergency services to their communities.

Cal Cities supports and strives to ensure local
control of emergency medical services by
authorizing cities and fire districts to prescribe and
monitor the manner and scope of pre-hospital
emergency medical services, including transport
through ambulance services, all provided within
local boundaries for the purpose of improving the
level of pre-hospital emergency medical service.

Cal Cities supports legislation to provide a
framework for a solution to long-standing conflict
between cities, counties, the fire service, and
LEMSA’s, particularly by local advisory committees
to review and approve the EMS plan and to
serve as an appeals body. Conflicts over EMS
governance may be resolved if stakeholders are
able to participate in EMS system design and
evaluation and if complainants are given a fair and
open hearing.

Cal Cities supports stored pressure dry chemical
fire extinguishers to be serviced and recharged
every six years or after each use, whichever occurs
first. Additionally, Cal Cities supports requiring a
licensed technician to perform the annual external
maintenance examination of stored pressure dry
chemical fire extinguishers.

Cal Cities opposes legislation, regulations, and
standards that impose minimum staffing and
response time standards for city fire and EMS
services since such determinations should reflect
the conditions and priorities of individual cities.

Cal Cities supports Emergency 911 systems to
ensure cities and counties are represented on
decisions affecting emergency response.

Cal Cities supports additional funding for local
agencies to recoup the costs associated with fire
safety in the community and timely mutual aid
reimbursement for disaster response services
in other jurisdictions. Cal Cities also supports
additional funding for local agencies to preposition
“emergency response” personnel and equipment
as well as coordinate notification systems with
local and state agencies.

Cal Cities supports incentives for homeowners
who undertake measures to “harden their homes.”
Public Safety

SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The Committee on Public Safety reviews
federal and state legislation and issues
related to law enforcement, fire and life
safety policies, emergency communications,
emergency services, disaster preparedness,
Indian gaming, and nuisance abatement.
56 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cal Cities supports legislation and additional
state and federal regulation crafted to ensure
that first responders can perform their duties
during emergency response operations without
interference from unmanned aerial systems, or
drones.

Cal Cities supports the authorization of cities to
approve and develop Community Paramedicine or
Triage to Alternate Destination programs for their
jurisdictions.

Cal Cities opposes policies that limit cities’ ability to privately contract for emergency medical services.

Law Enforcement
Cal Cities supports the promotion of public safety
through:
Stiffer penalties for violent offenders, and
Protecting state Citizens’ Option for Public
Safety (COPS) and federal Community Oriented
Police Services (COPS) funding and advocating
for additional funding for local agencies
to recoup the costs of crime and increase
community safety.

Cal Cities opposes booking fees and continues
to seek their repeal, while encouraging localities
to pursue resolution of the issues with their
respective counties.

Cal Cities supports a local government’s ability to
double the fine for traffic violations in school zones
in an attempt to reduce the speed of drivers and
protect our youth.

Cal Cities supports reimbursement by the federal
government to local agencies, specifically cities, for
the costs associated with incarcerating deportable
criminals, including the direct costs associated
with processing and booking at the time of arrest.

Cal Cities supports increased transparency
from insurance companies to consumers
regarding their home insurance policies and the
establishment of rates.

Emergency Services and Preparedness
Cal Cities supports the 2-1-1 California telephone
service as a non-emergency, human and
community services and disaster information
resource.

Cal Cities supports “Good Samaritan” protections
that include both medical and non-medical care
when applicable to volunteer emergency, law
enforcement, and disaster recovery personnel. Cal
Cities also supports providing “Good Samaritan”
protections to businesses that voluntarily place
automated external defibrillators (AEDs) on their
premises to reduce barriers to AED accessibility.

Emergency Communications Interoperability:

Cal Cities supports activities to develop and
implement statewide-integrated public
safety communication systems that facilitate
interoperability and other shared uses of public
safety spectrum with local, state, and federal law
enforcement, fire, emergency medical, and other
public safety agencies.

Cal Cities supports a single, efficient, performancebased state department to be responsible for overseeing and coordinating emergency
preparedness, response, recovery, and homeland
security activities.

Cal Cities supports efforts to secure additional
funding for local agencies to provide training
opportunities for appropriate first responder
personnel to improve their ability to respond to
oil spills, fires, and other hazardous materials
accidents.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 57

PUBLIC SAFETY
Cal Cities supports policies that promote a victim’s
right to seek restitution, create restrictions on the
early release of state inmates from incarceration
for the purpose of alleviating overcrowding,
and limit parole hearing opportunities for state
inmates serving a life sentence or paroled inmates
with a violation.

Cal Cities supports parolee search and seizure
terms, which aids local law enforcement’s ability to
manage paroled offenders.

Cal Cities supports increased penalties for metal
theft and recognizes that statewide regulation is
needed to discourage “jurisdiction shopping.” Cal
Cities also supports increased record-keeping and
reporting requirements for junk dealers, including
the collection of thumbprints from sellers.

Cal Cities supports accountability on the part
of law enforcement agencies concerning police
surveillance technology and policies, as well as
related oversight by local governing bodies, but
also strongly supports limits on disclosure of the
full capabilities of such technology to the general
public where such disclosure would compromise
the effectiveness of the technology’s law
enforcement applications.

Cal Cities supports policies that require
state government entities to notify local law
enforcement about known individuals that are
prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm.

Cal Cities supports policies that authorize law
enforcement officers to administer opioid
antagonist medications.

Cal Cities opposes policies that restrict law
enforcement agencies from utilizing surveillance
technology that would otherwise enhance their
ability to prevent criminal activity.

In addition to the mental health screening
provided by local hiring entities, Cal Cities supports
resources and education to support the mental
health needs of local public safety personnel.

Cal Cities recognizes the need to establish a peace
officer decertification process through POST.

Cal Cities supports the implementation of
the modern policing degree as long as there
is flexibility on how to comply with the new
requirement including other associate degrees.

Cal Cities supports the use of local, state, and
federal collaborative prevention and intervention
methods to reduce youth and gang violence.

Cal Cities supports efforts to provide additional
tools and language to address prostitution while
avoiding re-victimizing vulnerable individuals.

This could include reinstating the misdemeanor
offense of loitering with the intent to commit
prostitution, as long as there are safeguards to
ensure that victims can be contacted by law
enforcement in a safe and appropriate way and
provides access to services over incarceration
when determined appropriate.

Cal Cities supports Proposition 36 efforts to reduce
retail theft and shoplifting and efforts to reduce
the possession, sale and distribution of “hard
drugs”. Cal Cities supports increased charges or
penalties for those who involve minors in fentanyl
trafficking, who conduct fentanyl trafficking close
to schools and other areas designated for children,
or those who sell fentanyl to minors. Cal Cities also
supports efforts to reform Proposition 47 while
avoiding the return to mass incarceration.

Mental Health/Substance Use Disorder
Cal Cities supports the promulgation of policies
and the use of resources to increase collaboration
between first responders and health agencies
for incidents involving people living with mental
illness or experiencing substance use disorders.

Cal Cities supports additional funding and
resources to address the substance use crisis
through appropriate prevention and intervention
efforts, educational awareness campaigns, and
increased access to life-saving overdose treatment
aids such as naloxone.
58 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cal Cities supports resources for increased training
and education for first responders to serve
people living with mental illness or experiencing
substance use disorders, as well as increased
multidisciplinary collaboration.

Cal Cities supports transparency relating to
sustained findings of officer misconduct.

Cal Cities supports transparency and oversight
relating to criminal investigations of officer
misconduct.

Cal Cities supports the completion and disclosure
of findings relating to officer misconduct despite
their voluntary separation from the employing
agency.

Police Use of Force
Cal Cities supports transparency on the part of law
enforcement agencies regarding agencies’ policies
on the use of force.

Cal Cities supports the establishment of minimum
state standards on use of force that must be
included in all California law enforcement
agencies’ use of force policies.

Cal Cities supports basic training requirements
and guidelines for agencies and law enforcement
officers on use of force, including, but not limited
to training on the legal standards for use of force,
one’s duty to intercede, implicit and explicit bias
and alternatives to the use of deadly force.

Cal Cities opposes modifications to the legal
standard on use of force; to the extent, such
proposed changes elevate the safety risk to law
enforcement officers. Specific proposals in this
area should be carefully reviewed so that the
impacts of any changes are fully understood.

Cal Cities opposes the limitation of law
enforcement discretion to utilize less-lethal tools
for dispersing unruly or unlawful crowds.

Drones
Cal Cities supports policies that allow cities to
impose reasonable time, place, and manner
restrictions on the operation of drones in their
jurisdictions.

Cal Cities supports policies that authorize local law
enforcement to enforce state and local drone laws.

Cal Cities supports policies that promote the
availability of information on state and local
drone laws so that operators are aware of and
accountable to local rules.

Cal Cities supports local agencies’ ability to enact
and enforce rules of general applicability, such
as trespass, nuisance, or noise, in a manner that
addresses unsafe drone operations.

Cal Cities supports the promotion of transparency
to the public, and as technology permits,
encourages local agencies to pursue the
development and use of real-time drone tracking
systems to ensure residents can look up the details
of drones operating in a given area.

Cal Cities opposes state legislation or regulations
that outright bans drones.

Cal Cities supports the establishment of
governmental immunity for local jurisdictions that
designate drone recreational areas, which notify
the public that drones may be flying overhead, and
that persons enter these designated areas at their
own risk.

Fireworks
Cal Cities supports increased resources for local
enforcement of illegal fireworks and aggressive
interdiction efforts in collaboration with state
agencies.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 59

PUBLIC SAFETY
Wildland Urban Interface
Cal Cities supports activities to cooperate,
coordinate, and communicate in the development
of better land use policies and wildland fuel
management programs to decrease impacts to
public health and safety resulting from wildland
urban interface fires.

Nuisance Abatement
Cal Cities supports enhanced local control over
public nuisances including, but not limited to:
Adult entertainment facilities;
Problem alcohol establishments; and
Properties where illegal drugs are sold.

Indian Gaming
Cal Cities supports the following principles that
are intended to balance tribal self-reliance with
the local government mandate to protect public
health and safety.
Require an Indian Tribe that plans to construct
or expand a casino or other related businesses
to seek review and approval of the local
jurisdiction for such improvements consistent
with state law and local ordinances including
the California Environmental Quality Act,
with the Tribal government acting as the
lead agency and with judicial review in the
California courts.
Require mitigation of off-reservation impacts
consistent with environmental protection laws
that are at least as stringent as those of the
surrounding local community and CEQA.
Require written agreements between tribes
and affected local agencies to ensure tribes
are subject to local authority related to the
infrastructure needs and services outlined
above.
Require adequate compensation from the
tribes to the local agency providing the
government services that are required by the
tribal casino or related businesses.
Ensure compensation to local agencies
from the Special Distribution Fund for offreservation mitigation coupled with other sources to ensure adequate compensation.
Require a judicially enforceable agreement
between tribes and local jurisdictions on all
of these issues before a new compact or an
extended compact may become effective.
Establish appropriate criteria and guidelines to
address future compact negotiations.
The Governor should establish and follow
appropriate criteria to guide discretion of
the Governor and the Legislature when
considering whether to consent to tribal
gaming on lands acquired in trust after
October 17, 1988 and governed by the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. § 2719).

Gaming
Cal Cities supports measures expanding local
control over local gaming operations, including,
but not limited to, management of the hours
of operation and number of tables in an
establishment, as an effective tool to enhance
related local revenue streams. Cal Cities opposes
as a restriction on those same revenue streams
measures that would further restrict such local
control, including, but not limited to, the extension
of existing statewide gaming moratoriums.

Alcohol
Cal Cities supports policies that limit the ability
of minors to engage in alcohol consumption, and
limit youth access to alcoholic beverages, so long
as related state-mandated programs or services
provide for full reimbursement to all local agencies.

Cal Cities supports local policies that hold social
hosts responsible for underage drinking that
occurs on property under their possession, control,
or authority.
60 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cal Cities supports additional penalties for repeat
driving under the influence (DUI) offenders
that include, but are not limited to, permanent
revocation of an individual’s driver’s license.

Cal Cities supports legislation and other
regulations intended to improve local
governments’ enforcement capability against
alcohol licensees that are in violation of state law
and local ordinances.

Cal Cities supports the ability of bars and
restaurants to operate expanded outdoor premises
with local and state approval.

Cal Cities supports the sale of alcoholic beverages
for off-sale consumption if the beverages are in
manufacturer prepackaged containers with local
and state approval.

Cannabis Regulation
Cal Cities regards as a vital interest the
maintenance of local control over medical and
adult-use cannabis businesses and supports
measures that enhance and protect maximum
local regulatory, land use, and enforcement
authority in relation to such businesses.

Reaffirming that local control is paramount, Cal
Cities holds that cities must retain the authority
to regulate all medical and adult-use cannabis
businesses if the regulation relates to location,
operation, or establishment to best suit the needs
of the community.

Cal Cities affirms that revenue or other financial
benefits from creating a statewide tax structure on
medical cannabis should be considered only after
the public safety and health ramifications are fully
evaluated and addressed.

While the value of cannabis as a physical or mental
health treatment option is uncertain, Cal Cities
recognizes the need for proactive steps to mitigate
the proliferation of unlawful medical cannabis
businesses and other access points acting outside
state or local regulation.

Cal Cities supports cannabis regulation only to
the degree that any such regulatory structure
preserves and upholds local control and the police
power of local governments pursuant to Article XI,
Section 7 of the California Constitution.

Cal Cities opposes policies that prohibit local
law enforcement from cooperating with federal
authorities on investigations into matters involving
violations or other criminal activity by cannabis
licensees, including, but not limited to, money
laundering, sales to minors and diversion.

Graffiti
Cal Cities endorses the “Tag You Lose” antigraffiti campaign and encourages other cities to implement this program into their existing antigraffiti programs.

Cal Cities supports increased authority and
resources devoted to cities for abatement of
graffiti and other acts of public vandalism.

Sex Offender Management
Cal Cities supports policies that will assist local
law enforcement with the comprehensive and
collaborative management of sex offenders,
including tools for tracking the location of sex
offenders within local jurisdictions, so long
as state-mandated programs provide for full
reimbursement to all local agencies.

Corrections
Cal Cities supports constitutional protections for
state-funded corrections realignment programs,
so long as it includes funding for local police
department needs. Cal Cities also supports
increasing city representation and participation in
the Community Corrections Partnerships, wh are
charged with developing local corrections plans.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 61

PUBLIC SAFETY
Cal Cities warns those individuals who advocate
or perpetrate hate, not to test the cities’ resolve
to oppose them as each city is encouraged to
vigorously pursue a course of investigation,
apprehension, prosecution, conviction, and
incarceration of all those who participate in hate
crimes.

Cal Cities supports local law enforcement agencies
retaining the discretion to issue a concealed carry
weapon permit, and thereby opposes policies that
mandate the issuance of such permits.

Cal Cities supports the honoring of Gun Violence
Restraining Orders (GVROs) that are issued by
other states.

Miscellaneous
Cal Cities opposes reductions to city authority
to regulate needle and syringe accessibility and
exchange programs.

Cal Cities asks any company manufacturing or
marketing or planning to manufacture or market
colored-tread tires in California to voluntarily
abandon such a product line and thereby prevent
the public safety, environmental and social
problems these tires can potentially cause.
62 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
Cities and Cal Cities
Preamble
Inherent in these recommendations is the
underlying principle that meaningful fiscal
reform should allow each level of government to
adequately finance its service responsibilities, with
each being accountable to taxpayers for its own
programs.

Efficiency
Cities and Cal Cities should continue to emphasize
efficiency and effectiveness, encouraging, and
assisting cities to achieve the best possible use of
city resources.

Authority and Accountability
Cities must locally achieve political authority
and accountability for revenues raised and
services provided. For accountability, revenues
should be logically linked to traditional and
emerging responsibilities. Cities must effectively
communicate the good news about city programs
and operations, as well as information concerning
financial conditions and city responsibilities.

Alliances
Cities should seek alliances with counties,
schools, other cities, employee organizations,
other local agencies, business, and professional
organizations, and nonprofit organizations to
support cooperation, sound financial policies, and
joint action.

Initiative
Cities and Cal Cities are prepared to use the
statewide initiative process, if necessary, to
secure fiscal independence and a sound
intergovernmental financial structure. Initiative
efforts should, to the extent feasible, incorporate
and, in no case violate, the principles developed by
the Fiscal Reform Task Force as follows:
Cities require a greater share of the property
tax and other reliable, discretionary revenues in
order to finance local services to property.
Cities require constitutional protection of their
revenue sources in order to provide insurance
against diversion by the state of these revenues
in the future for non-municipal purposes.
Major reforms in the unfunded mandate
reimbursement process should be enacted to
make it more workable and meaningful.

Revenue and Taxation

SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The Committee on Revenue and Taxation
reviews issues related to finance administration,
taxation reform, revenue needs, and revenue
sources at the federal, state, and local levels.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 63

REVENUE AND TAXATION
Legislature or the Voters
Local Authority and Accountability
To preserve local authority and accountability for
cities, state policies must:
Ensure the integrity of existing city revenue
sources for all cities, including the city share
and situs allocation, where applicable, of
property tax, sales tax, vehicle license fees, etc.
Ensure the integrity of city revenue sources by
providing fraud deterrence and enforcement
tools that improve the collection of public
funds.
Protect the authority of local governments to
collect revenues from telecommunications
providers and ensure that any future changes
are revenue neutral for local governments.
Oppose any state or federal legislation that
would pre-empt or threaten local taxation
authority including, but not limited to, Utility
User’s Taxes.
Allow every level of government to enjoy
budgetary independence from programs and
costs imposed by other levels of government.
Authorize a simple majority of the voters in
a city or county to establish local priorities,
including the right to increase taxes or issue
general obligation bonds.
Offer incentives to reward cities achieving
program goals, rather than withhold or reduce
revenues to accomplish targets.

State Legislative and Budget Reforms.

To stabilize state funding and programs and
reverse the trend of the state’s reliance on local
revenues to solve the state’s fiscal crises, the state
should implement fiscal and legislative reforms
which may include for consideration the following:
A two-year spending plan with the first session
focused on expenditures over the period.
Oversight hearings that review programs for
savings, duplication, or gaps in services.
Limits on the number of bills that legislators
may introduce.
A prudent reserve fund.
Official records kept of all Assembly and Senate
official meetings.
A balanced deficit reduction approach, which
could include temporary revenue increases
dedicated solely to retiring short-term debt,
spending cuts, short-term borrowing and
multi-year spending limitations.
Long-term restructuring measures, including
increased local government property tax
shares to create balanced growth and separate
budget detail of all state expenditures at the
local level.

State Mandates
The state must provide full and prompt
reimbursement to all local agencies for all statemandated programs and/or infractions and losses associated with local revenue shifts.

Local agencies must be authorized to petition
the Commission on State Mandates immediately
after legislation is chaptered for determination of
eligibility for reimbursement and reserve the right
to directly pursue court intervention without an
administrative appeals process.

Reforms are needed in the mandate approval and
reimbursement process.

The state should be prohibited from deferring
mandate payments.

Unless specifically requested by a city, no new
duties, responsibilities, or obligations should be
assigned to a city or cities under state realignment.

Additional Revenue
Additional revenue is required in the state/local
revenue structure. There is not enough money
generated by the current system or allocated
to the local level by the current system to meet
the requirements of a growing population and
deteriorating services and facilities.
64 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
When disasters or emergencies occur statewide
or in various areas of the state, state government
has traditionally stepped in to assist with recovery
efforts through various means, including the
passage of legislation to provide income and
property tax relief to affected individuals and
businesses, and reimbursing local governments for
their losses. Cal Cities supports disaster recovery
legislation that includes mitigation for losses
experienced by local governments. Cal Cities
supports this aid being allocated to cities through
a process that objectively accounts for the impacts
that a disaster or emergency has had on a city’s
residents, infrastructure, economy, and revenues.

In the event that aid is provided solely on a percapita basis, Cal Cities support that it be done equally per resident.

Cal Cities also supports establishing a federal
debt guarantee program that supports state
catastrophe insurance programs for postevent debt that they incur as a result of paying for insured losses caused by major natural
catastrophes.

Cal Cities supports legislation that would make
adjustments to the vehicle license fee-property
tax swap of 2004 to ensure that the formula
appropriately accounts for city incorporations and
annexations of inhabited territory.

Cal Cities supports legislation that would bolster
existing local efforts to enforce local ordinances
and revenue collection associated with short-term
rentals. Legislation must protect local transient
occupancy tax collection authority, tax rates, and
enforcement authority associated with short-term
rentals.

Reduce Competition
Revenue from new regional or state taxes or from
increased sales tax rates should be distributed in
a way that reduces competition for situs-based
revenue. (Revenue from the existing sales tax rate
and base, including future growth from increased
sales or the opening of new retail centers, should
continue to be returned to the point of sale.)
The existing situs-based sales tax under the
Bradley Burns 1% baseline should be preserved
and protected.

The equitable allocation of remote revenues
from e-commerce recognizes both sides of the
transaction and their contribution to sales tax
generation. Allocation of the Bradley Burns 1% local
sales tax revenue from in-state online purchases
should proportionately benefit those communities
that provide the infrastructure and incentives
that facilitate the transaction and delivery of
those goods and those communities that are the
destinations for the goods. The regional impacts
to infrastructure, land use, environmental quality,
and public health stemming from e-commerce as
well as the financial dependence of communities
on the resulting revenues must be recognized.

Changes to consumer behavior, which consists of
more online shopping, must also be considered as
to the fiscal sustainability of all cities.

City officials should account for these factors in
the evolving marketplace and continuously strive
for prospective fair and equitable revenue sharing
based on data, as available. City officials should
also employ their best judgement to support
policies that benefit the sustainability of all cities.

Restrictions should be implemented and enforced
to prohibit the enactment of agreements designed
to circumvent the principle of situs-based sales
and redirect or divert sales tax revenues from
other communities when the physical location of
the affected businesses does not change.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 65

REVENUE AND TAXATION
Sales tax rebate agreements involving online
retailers can be inappropriate because they may
have the effect of encouraging revenue to be
shifted away from numerous communities and
concentrated to the benefit of one.

Prospectively, sales tax rebate agreements shall
be no longer than 20 years, and shall not rebate
more than 50% of the sales tax generated by
the private business. Existing sales tax rebate
agreements shall not have the ability to be
renewed in perpetuity (i.e., term extensions that
would be a loophole to avoid new requirements
are prohibited). Additionally, the California
Department of Tax and Fee Administration shall
exclude from the county pool calculations of the
local Bradley Burns 1% sales and use tax the sales
tax gained from a sales tax sharing agreement
that is rebated to a private business.

There shall be a statewide database and
dashboard of all Economic Development Subsidy
Reports (such as sales tax rebate agreements) on a
website.

Funding for Counties
Counties require additional funding if they are to
fulfill their state-mandated and traditional roles.

As legal agents of the state, county expenditures in
that capacity should be funded by the state. Their
local programs should be financed locally.

The concept of “self-help” for counties should be
expanded. An example might be that counties
could receive certain state funding if they raise a
specified level of revenue locally.

To alleviate competition among cities
and counties, funding for counties should
be accompanied by agreements on new
development in undeveloped areas within the
cities’ sphere of influence.

Regional Revenues
Local government issues, programs, and services
do not always recognize local government
jurisdictional boundaries. In cases where regional
issues, programs, and services are identified, multijurisdictional revenues should then be identified and implemented. As an example, the sales tax has
been considered and used by many countywide
areas to address multi-jurisdictional transportation
issues.

Support regional cooperation on common interests
and goals by providing access to share incremental
growth in ERAF property tax.

Local Financing and Tax Increment Tools
Tax Increment Tools
Cal Cities supports the enactment and expansion
of tax increment financing authority for economic
development, infrastructure, and community
revitalization, including recently enacted
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District Law
(EIFD), Community Revitalization and Investment
Authorities (CRIA), and Annexation Development
Plans.

Cal Cities supports the enactment and expansion
of state tax incentives that assist city economic
development and community revitalization efforts.

Revenue Modernization
Property Tax
Cal Cities supports legislation which would
clarify and improve the definition of “change
of ownership” for property tax reassessment
purposes to include when more than 90% of
direct or indirect ownership interests in a legal
entity are cumulatively transferred in one or
more transactions. Such changes would reduce
the use of complicated strategies employed to
evade reassessment of property upon changes of
ownership.
66 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Sales Tax
Sales and Use Tax Base: Cal Cities supports
modernization to the sales tax through
measures that would either broaden the tax
base on goods, which includes reviewing
existing exemptions on certain goods and
expanding to digital forms of goods that are
otherwise taxed, and expanding the sales tax
base to services, such as those commonly
taxed in other states. Specific proposals in
these areas should be carefully reviewed so
that the impacts of any changes are fully
understood.
Sales Tax Sourcing Rules: Support as Cal
Cities policy that point of sale (situs) is where
the customer receives the product. Specific
proposals in this area should be carefully
reviewed so that the impacts of any changes
are fully understood.

Cal Cities supports as policy allowing more
direct reporting of use taxes related to
construction projects to the jurisdiction where
the construction activity is located by reducing
existing regulatory threshold from $5 million to
$1,000,000. Additionally, contractors should be
required, rather than optionally permitted, to
submit appropriate documentation for direct
allocation of sales and use tax revenue to the
location of the construction jobsite.

Cal Cities supports as policy requiring retailers
to report the local use tax for transactions
of $100,000 or more to the participating
jurisdiction where the first functional use is
made.
County Pool Use Tax Allocations: Support
Cal Cities working with the state California
Department of Tax and Fee Administration
to update the county pool allocation process
to ensure that more revenues are allocated
to the jurisdiction where the purchase or first
use of a product occurs (usually where the
product is delivered). Use Tax collections from
online sales, including from the South Dakota
v Wayfair Decision, should be shifted out of
county pools, and allocated to the destination
jurisdiction whose Bradley Burns tax applies
and not throughout the entire county.
State Sales Tax Exemptions: Cal Cities
opposes state legislation that proposes to
grant exemptions for specific products that fail
to protect those portions of the sales tax that
are dedicated to local government.
Data Collection: Cal Cities supports efforts to
modernize statewide sales tax data collection
to improve understanding of out-of-state and
in-state remote sales.

Federal Streamlined Sales and Use Tax
Agreement (SSUTA)
There are more questions than answers for
California cities about potential state participation
in the SSUTA. The SSUTA offers many more risks
for California cities than benefits. Thus, Cal Cities
should:
Continue to monitor developments of the
SSUTA and related federal legislations, but
not support any additional efforts that would
lead to California joining the agreement. This
position can always be revisited at a future
point if events change.
Strongly oppose any federal effort that
attempts to force California to conform to
the Agreement, or amendments to federal
legislation that would directly undermine
California’s utility user tax structure.
Work with the California Department of Tax
and Fee Administration and other parties on
alternative efforts to increase the collection
of use taxes within California. Share Cal Cities
analysis of the SSUTA with interested parties,
exchange information on use tax collection
issues with municipal Leagues in other states,
including those states with tax structures
similar to California.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 67

REVENUE AND TAXATION
Federal Legislation Requiring Use Tax
Collection
Cal Cities supports federal legislation that would
require the collection of use tax from internet or
“remote sales” that meets the following conditions:
Is limited to the collection of sales and use
taxes.
Does not require states to participate in the
SSUTA.
Requires remote sellers to collect the full
destination rate (combination of state and local
rate at location the product will be delivered).
Exempts intrastate (non-remote sales within
California) from the destination rule.
Provides sufficient flexibility to accommodate
California’s tax structure. (There are instances
where the state, for policy reasons, has opted
not to collect the state’s share of sales taxes on
an item, but the local rates on those items are
still collected).

State regulatory actions and possible legislation
may be needed to address issues raised by the
collection of new revenue from remote sales.

Implementation by the California Department
of Tax and Fee Administration would likely
require appropriate software for remote sellers to
implement the new system.

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Summary of Existing Policy and
Guiding Principles
Transportation
Cal Cities supports constitutional protections
for transportation funding to be dedicated for
transportation purposes only and opposes any
efforts to reduce or eliminate transportation
funding for local governments.

Cal Cities supports protecting the additional
funding for local transportation, bridges and other
critical unmet infrastructure needs. One of Cal
Cities’ priorities is to protect the consistent and
continuous appropriation of new monies from
various sources directly to cities and counties for
the preservation, maintenance, and rehabilitation
of the local street and road system. New and
additional revenues should continue to meet the
following policies:
System Preservation and Maintenance.

Given the substantial needs for all modes of
transportation, a significant portion of new
revenues should continue to focus on system
preservation. Once the system has been
brought to a state of good repair, revenues for
maintenance of the system would be reduced
to a level that enables sufficient recurring
maintenance.
Commitment to Efficiency. Priority should
continue to be used to improve current
systems. Recipients of revenues should
incorporate operational improvements and
new technology in projects.
All Users Based System. New revenues
should continue to be borne by all users of the
system from the traditional personal vehicle
that relies solely on gasoline, hybrid, or electric
technology, to commercial vehicles moving
goods in the state, and even transit, bicyclists,
and pedestrians who also benefit from the use
of an integrated transportation network.
Alternative Funding Mechanisms. Given
that new technologies continue to improve
the efficiency of many types of transportation
methods, transportation stakeholders must be
open to new alternative funding mechanisms.

Further, the goal of reducing greenhouse
gases is also expected to affect vehicle miles
traveled, thus further reducing gasoline
consumption and revenue from the existing
Transportation,
Communications,
and Public Works

SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The Committee on Transportation,
Communications, and Public Works reviews
state and federal legislation related to
transportation funding, construction, public
works, utilities, telecommunications, and
other related areas.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 69
TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PUBLIC WORKS
gas tax. The existing user-based tax is an
unsustainable revenue source. Collectively,
we must have the political will to consider
alternate transportation revenue streams that
will provide reliable and sustainable revenues
for local transportation projects.
Unified Statewide Solution. For statewide
revenues, all transportation stakeholders
must stand united in the protection of new
revenues. Any new statewide revenues should
address the needs of the entire statewide
transportation network, focused in areas where
there is defensible and documented need.
Equity. New revenues should continue to be
distributed in an equitable manner, benefiting
both the north and south and urban, suburban,
and rural areas as well as being equally split
between state and local projects.
Flexibility. Needs vary from region to region
and city to city. Local governments should
continue to have needed flexibility for new
revenues and revenue authority to provide the
appropriate level programs and activities that
constituents rely on.
Accountability. All tax dollars must be spent
properly, and recipients of new revenues must
be held accountable to the taxpayers, whether
at the state or local level.
Education. Through the City and County
Pavement Improvement Center (CCPIC),
educational opportunities to provide additional
research and development, guidance,
specifications, tools, and training in pavement
management and engineering must be made
available to local governments to help ensure
local streets and roads last longer, cost less,
and are more sustainable.

Cal Cities supports a permanent shift of the sales
tax on gasoline for transportation purposes and
an allocation formula equivalent to 40/40/20
split of 40% to cities and counties, 40% to State
Transportation Improvement Program (“STIP”),
and 20% to transit.

Cal Cities supports enhanced autonomy for local
transportation decision-making and pursues
transportation policy changes that move more
dollars and decisions to local policy leaders. Cal
Cities supports policies to ensure transportation
investments are being used for transportation
purposes. Cal Cities will seek the maximum
share of available funding for local transportation
programs. Cal Cities supports implementation of
federal transportation funding re-authorization
legislation in a manner that supports these
principles.

Cal Cities supports the preservation and expansion
of transportation grant funding opportunities to
help incorporate new transportation technologies
and practices into local transportation networks,
such as active transportation grant funding and
transportation innovation grant funding.

Cal Cities opposes any state actions that would
result in a reduction of revenues for local
governments from the Highway Users Tax Account
and/or the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Program. Cal Cities supports a requirement
for the state to consult with Cal Cities on any
transportation policy changes to help ensure such
strategies include funding equal to or greater than
what cities already receive to maintain, operate,
and rehabilitate their existing streets and roads
network.

Cal Cities supports the ongoing study of the
Road Charge Program and any other alternative
to the gas tax to sustainably and equitably fund
transportation infrastructure.

Cal Cities supports efforts that streamline funding
processes between the state, federal, and local
governments that help reduce the amount of
time and resources it takes to fund and complete
transportation projects, such as NEPA delegation
and the Match-Exchange Program.

Cal Cities opposes conditioning a city’s share of
transportation funding on housing-related goals,
70 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
such as planning and production, instead favoring
comprehensive housing solutions for housing
problems.

Cal Cities supports bicycle and pedestrian access
with maximum local flexibility to prioritize this
transportation need, as long as funding is available
directly for it and other transportation priorities
do not negatively affect transportation funding.

Cal Cities opposes any mandatory set-asides or
prioritization for bicycle and pedestrian access
on the state or local system using state or local
maintenance and/or rehabilitation funding.

Cal Cities opposes requiring a city or parking
processing agency to automatically cancel
notices of parking violations, prior to a request
from a vehicle owner, if the violation does
not substantially match the corresponding
information on the vehicle registration.

Cal Cities opposes efforts that limit the ability
for cities to remove or immobilize vehicles
that chronically ignore moving and/or parking
violations and/or are operating unlawfully on
public roads.

Cal Cities supports the visionary effort of the HighSpeed Rail project and supports the involvement of local officials in the High-Speed Rail project
planning and implementation. However, Cal
Cities opposes efforts to exempt the High-Speed
Rail project from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and any other effort that would
eliminate an opportunity for local input. Cal Cities
also supports efforts to reaffirm voter support of
the project, including voter reconsideration for the
bond.

Cal Cities supports the development of best
practices and funding to support all modes of
goods movement including ports, roadways,
storage/distribution centers, rail, and air. A focus
should be kept on job creation and retention,
economic development, and safety with cities
actively engaged in their region for appropriate
goods movement decisions.

Cal Cities supports efforts to improve the state’s
ability to respond to and investigate significant
transportation accidents in a transparent and
timely manner to improve rail shipment, railroad,
aviation, marine, highway, safe autonomous
vehicle activities, and pipeline safety.

Cal Cities supports efforts to expand the Caltrans
Business Logo Program, including the accurate
deployment of Electric Vehicle Charging Station
(“EVCS”) charging signage.

Cal Cities opposes policies that undermine local
decision making in the permitting process of
refueling zero emission vehicles, including EVCS in
the public right of way.

Cal Cities supports having a balanced regulatory
framework over both the taxi, autonomous vehicle
and transportation network companies (“TNC”)
industries and encourages the CPUC to include
biometric identification data from TNC drivers and
to have TNC companies conduct vehicle safety
inspections and a policy where both industries
where they are regulated by the state’s CPUC,
while giving cities the ability to regulate both
industries when any given city finds that state
regulation is insufficient for their community.

Cal Cities supports the Full Funding Grant
Agreement (FFGA) process for the Federal Transit
Administration’s (FTA) Capital Investment Grant
(CIG) program.

Public Works
Cal Cities supports retaining maximum flexibility
for timely and cost-effective completion of public
works projects. Cal Cities supports innovative
strategies, including public-private partnerships at
the state and local levels to enhance public works
funding.

Cal Cities supports efforts to divert products that
contribute to decreased capacity and increased
maintenance costs at wastewater treatment
facilities.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 71
TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PUBLIC WORKS
Cal Cities encourages the state to adopt maximum
response time for all necessary state reports,
including Project Study Reports, to allow for a
timely and cost-effective completion of public
works projects. Cal Cities supports the certification
of private firms to complete reports when state
staff is unavailable.

Cal Cities supports expedited permitting when the
work is necessary to ensure the integrity of utilities, provided that local permitting and plan review
framework and requirements are met.

Cal Cities opposes efforts to alter the way
that Caltrans prioritizes its litter cleanup and
abatement program to just the segments of
highway that receive the highest number of
complaints.

Cal Cities supports improving the state’s seismic
readiness and resiliency, including tax credits for
retrofitting seismically vulnerable buildings and
the state conducting its own survey of buildings
that are potentially vulnerable in seismic-prone
regions of the state. Cal Cities opposes any efforts
to impose such a mandate on local governments.

Cal Cities supports the inclusion of wildfire
mitigation as an eligible project to receive the
California Public Utilities Commission’s Rule 20
funds and efforts to expand funding for Rule 20.

Micromobility
Cal Cities supports efforts that promote safety and
reassert local authority when regulating emerging
transportation technologies, such as e-scooters
and e-bicycles, and opposes efforts to limit this
authority and the city’s access to meaningful
data from companies operating within their
jurisdiction.

Vehicles
Cal Cities supports requiring at least one person
for any autonomous heavy-duty vehicle or
autonomous transit vehicles during the early
stages of autonomous vehicle deployment.

Cal Cities opposes all efforts that allow vehicles
and vehicle operators on the road that will
jeopardize the integrity of the public infrastructure
or the health and safety of the motoring public.

Cal Cities supports all efforts to retain maximum
control of the local street and road system. Cal
Cities supports traffic safety enhancements such
as motorcycle helmets, child restraints, seat belts,
and speed limit laws.

Cal Cities opposes any efforts to increase truck
size or weight. The size and weight of trucks are
important because they affect the stability and
control of the truck, the way it interacts with
other traffic, and the impact it has when colliding
with other vehicles. Truck safety is particularly
important because these vehicles share city streets
and county roads with users — such as, motorists,
pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, and bus riders.

Cal Cities encourages cities to promote safe driving
across California and the education of the general
public about the dangers of texting while driving.

Cal Cities supports a requirement that all state
rulemaking bodies consider the following factors
for any proposed rule impacting vehicles: the
weight added to any vehicle; the effect any added
weight would have on pavement wear; and the
resulting costs to state and local governments.

Cal Cities supports efforts to protect consumers
from unscrupulous tow trucker companies and
operators.

Cal Cities holds that increasing vehicle fines do
not improve safety around school zones and
encourages other efforts, such as increased police
presence and additional crossing guards, as better
solutions to safety issues in school zones.

Cal Cities supports legislation that authorizes
the testing or conducting of pilot projects for
autonomous vehicles in a safe manner.

Cal Cities supports policies that require local
decision making in the authorization and oversight
of autonomous vehicle operations.
72 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cal Cities supports policies that allows cities and
ticketing authorities to ticket/cite autonomous
vehicles.

Cal Cities support policies that promote safer
environments for the operation of autonomous
vehicles and allow first responders and local law
enforcement the ability to interrupt and redirect
wayward autonomous vehicles.

Contracts
Cal Cities supports maintaining maximum local
flexibility in the area of contracting and contract
negotiations. Cal Cities supports changes to law
that allow cities options to use design-build and
progressive design build delivery methods and
contracting and other innovative delivery methods
to bring efficiency to public contracting. Cal
Cities also supports contracting out with private
entities to increase project delivery efficiency and
affordability.

Cal Cities opposes efforts to shift additional legal
costs and liability away from design professionals
and contractors to local governments
Telecommunications
Cal Cities supports a state tax levied on direct
broadcast satellite television service providers if the proceeds are distributed to support local public
safety programs consistent with a geographic
distribution methodology that reflects households
using this service and provided that the tax is
repealed should the revenues be diverted by the
state for another purpose.

Traditional franchising at the local level has
served the valuable purpose of tailoring service to
unique local conditions and needs and assuring
responsiveness of providers to consumers. The
continued involvement of local government in any
new state or federal regulatory scheme by way
of locally negotiated agreements is an essential
component of telecommunications regulations;
best serves the needs of consumers and is
consistent with the goal of providing consumers
greater choice in telecommunications options.

Any new state or federal standards must conform
to the following principles:

Net Neutrality
Access to fast, reliable, and high-quality
internet is essential for the success of our
collective communities.
Reliable communications and data networks
for essential services, such as police and fire,
are necessary, especially during times of
emergency.
Communications and data networks are
increasingly important for the relationship
between local government and its residents
and businesses.
Net neutrality prevents internet service
providers from blocking, throttling, degrading,
or providing for paid prioritization of lawful
content, applications, or services.
Free and open internet can spur innovation
and help close the digital divide in California.

Revenue Protection
Protect the authority of local governments to
collect revenues from telecommunications
providers and ensure that any future changes
are revenue neutral for local governments.
Regulatory fees and/or taxes should apply
equitably to all telecommunications service
providers.
A guarantee that all existing and any new
fees/taxes remain with local governments to
support local public services and mitigate
impacts on local rights-of-way.
Oppose any state or federal legislation that
would pre-empt or threaten local taxation
authority
Rights-of-Way
To protect the public’s investment, the control
of public rights-of-way must remain local.

CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org | 73
TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PUBLIC WORKS
Local governments must retain full control
over the time, place, and manner for the use
of the public right-of-way in providing utilities,
broadband and telecommunications services,
including the appearance and aesthetics of
equipment placed within it.

Access
All local community residents should have
uninterrupted access to essential broadband
programming and telecommunications
services. Cal Cities supports funding and
resources to provide access to high-speed
broadband infrastructure, including municipal
broadband, for all California communities, to
close the digital divide, especially in unserved
and underserved communities.
Telecommunications providers should be
required to specify a reasonable timeframe for
deployment of telecommunications services
that includes a clear plan for the sequencing of
the build-out of these facilities within the entire
franchise area.

Public Education and Government (PEG)
Support
The resources required of new entrants should
be used to meet PEG support requirements
in a balanced manner in partnership with
incumbent providers.
For cities currently without PEG support
revenues, a minimum percentage of required
support needs to be determined.

Institutional or Fiber Network (INET)
The authority for interested communities
to establish INET services and support for
educational and local government facilities
should remain at the local level.

Public Safety Services
The authority for E-911 and 911 services should
remain with the local government, including
any compensation for the use of the right-ofway. All E-911 and 911 calls made by voice over internet protocol shall be routed to local public
safety answering points (PSAPs); i.e., local
dispatch centers.
All video providers must provide local
emergency notification service.

Customer Service Protection
State consumer protection laws should
continue to apply as a minimum standard and
should be enforced at the local level. Local
governments should retain the authority to
assess penalties to improve customer service.

Wireless Infrastructure
Existing telecommunications providers and
new entrants shall adhere to local city policies
on public utility undergrounding.
Cal Cities supports the authority of cities
to zone and plan for the deployment of
broadband and telecommunications
infrastructure. Cal Cities supports the ability
of cities to maintain and manage the public
right-of-way and receive compensation for
its use. Cal Cities supports the innovation
and economic development potential of
the “information superhighway” and the
many possible benefits in the areas of
telecommuting and productivity it promises.

Cal Cities will work with the CPUC, the various
telephone companies, and federal regulatory
agencies to improve telephone area code
planning in California.
Cal Cities supports model agreements
between cities and wireless communications
providers for the deployment of wireless
infrastructure, including small cells and macro
cell towers, within their jurisdiction.
Cal Cities supports a requirement of
telecommunications providers to notify
the California Office of Emergency Services
(CalOES) of 911 service or emergency warning
outages to help ensure the most efficient
deployment of emergency services in affected
areas.
74 | CAL CITIES • www.calcities.org

SUMMARY OF EXISTING POLICY AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Plain Old Telephone System (POTS):

Cal Cities believes the following principles in order
to ensure minimum standards are met before
service withdrawals of plain old telephone systems
are made:
Require that reliable communications systems
are in place prior to any technology transition
to ensure vital government services and public
safety operations are available to communicate
with citizens during emergencies.
Telecommunications service should be
technology-neutral to include similar
regulatory protections and obligations, such
as maintenance of infrastructure, access to
facilities, and provision of basic voice and
broadband service.
Ensure a transparent process for the phaseout of POTS, avoiding self-certification and arbitrary timelines for CPUC review of
withdrawal requests.
Require carriers to assist local governments in a
proposed service withdrawal area to determine
which public services are dependent on them.
Require the CPUC to consult with state
and local agencies to verify alternative
communications services that meet or
exceed POTS quality, accessibility, reliability,
and affordability and determine adequate
transition times, especially to ensure
functionality of the 911 system.
For wireless technology alternatives, local
governments must have guaranteed priority
access to the 911 system.
Ensure state enforcement and accountability
over any proposed service withdrawals.
Require that the transition to an alternative
service is cost-neutral for consumers, with
additional costs borne by the carriers,
including ancillary costs such as software and
equipment, for instance.
Require the CPUC to notify and work with
cities and other local governments of proposed
service withdrawals to ensure appropriate
transitions.
Carrier cost savings from any such transition
should be shared with customers, including
local governments through a state-developed
and administered financial assistance program.
Require that “Lifeline” rates for customers with
special needs are cost and technology-neutral,
in the short- and long-term.
Require that telecommunications companies
that withdraw plain old telephone service
within any given area continue to maintain
the infrastructure and if no longer in use, be
responsible and pay for the removal of the
infrastructure.

Cal Cities opposes a deregulated framework for
Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology
given that VoIP is often a “communication of last
resort,” as the state’s populace rapidly moves away
from plain old telephone service and onto VoIP or
wireless communications.

Air Pollution
Cal Cities will monitor developments and the
ramifications of efforts to regulate air quality and
related congestion strategies as it is related to
state and local transportation networks.

Lakeport City CouncilSeptember 1, 2026

Lakeport City Council
September 1, 2026