Existing law provides that in any county in which 2 or more cities are incorporated, there is a city selection committee for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law. Existing law provides that the membership of each city selection committee shall consist of the mayor of each city within the county and that when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the city selection committee, he or she shall designate another member of the citys legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayors place.

This bill, for the city selection committee in the County of Los Angeles, would require that when the mayor or the mayors designated member is unable to attend a city selection committee meeting, the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore serve as the voting member on his or her behalf, and if the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore is unable to attend that meeting, then the next ranking council member would be required to serve as the voting member on the mayors behalf, as provided.

This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles.

Existing law provides that in any county in which 2 or more cities are incorporated, there is a city selection committee for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law. Existing law provides that the membership of each city selection committee shall consist of the mayor of each city within the county and that when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the city selection committee, he or she shall designate another member of the citys legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayors place.

This bill, for the city selection committee in the County of Los Angeles, would require that when the mayor or the mayors designated member is unable to attend a city selection committee meeting, the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore serve as the voting member on his or her behalf, and if the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore is unable to attend that meeting, then the next ranking council member would be required to serve as the voting member on the mayors behalf, as provided.

This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles.

Existing law provides that in any county in which 2 or more cities are incorporated incorporated, there is a city selection committee for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law. Existing law provides that the membership of each city selection committee shall consist of the mayor of each city within the county and that when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the city selection committee, he or she shall designate another member of the citys legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayors place.

This bill, for the city selection committee in the County of Los Angeles, would require that when the mayor or the mayors designated member is unable to attend a city selection committee meeting meeting, the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore serve as the voting member on his or her behalf, and if the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore are is unable to attend that meeting meeting, then the next ranking council member would be required to serve as the voting member on the mayors behalf, as provided.

This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles.

The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city, county, or city and county to adopt a comprehensive general plan that addresses a number of elements. If a general plan has been adopted, each county or city officer, department, board, or commission, as specified, is required to submit a list of proposed public works for the ensuing fiscal year. The agency receiving the list of proposed public works is required to prepare, as specified, a coordinated program of proposed public works for the ensuing fiscal year.

This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 347

Author:(Chang)

As Amended Ver:August 18, 2015

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: L. GOV.

SUMMARY: Requires specified city council members to serve as the voting member of the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee when a mayor or the mayor's designated member is unable to attend a meeting.

The Senate amendments add the mayor's designated member to this bill's provisions.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes, in any county in which two or more cities are incorporated, a City Selection Committee (Committee) for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law.

2. Provides that the membership of each Committee consists of the mayor of each city within the county.

3. Provides that, when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee, he or she shall designate another member of the city's legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayor's place.

AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill:

1. Provided that, for the Committee in the County of Los Angeles (L.A. County), the following shall apply when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee:

   1. The vice mayor or mayor pro tempore shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote; and,

   2. In the absence of the mayor and the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore, the next ranking council member shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote. The ranking council member shall be determined by seniority of service on the council.

2. Found and declared that a special law is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of California Constitution Article IV, Section 16 because of the challenges faced as a result of the current governance structure of L.A. County.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS:

1. Bill Summary. This bill provides an alternative method for ensuring replacement members for L.A. County's Committee when a mayor or the mayor's designated member is unable to attend. In these cases, this bill provides that the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore shall serve as the voting member. When neither of those officials can attend, the next ranking council member shall serve as the voting member. The ranking council member is determined by seniority of service on the council. This bill is sponsored by the Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities.

2. Author's Statement. According to the author, "Los Angeles County has 88 cities, spanning 4,000 square miles. Los Angeles County's City Selection Committee must meet in person and requires a quorum of 45 cities to vote. Over the years, Los Angeles County’s City Selection Committee has been unable to reach consistent quorums to fill the appointments, leading to frustration by mayors and councilmembers and in some cases, vacancies that remained open for years. Changing the proxy designation would allow Los Angeles County's City Selection Committee to increase those eligible from each city to meet the necessary quorum."

3. Background. Existing law creates a Committee in each county with two or more incorporated cities for the purpose of appointing city representatives to such boards, commissions and agencies as may be required by law. Committee membership is comprised of the mayor from each city in the county. Existing law requires the mayor to designate another member of the city council to serve as a replacement if the mayor is unable to attend a Committee meeting. This requirement has hampered the ability of L.A. County's Committee to achieve a quorum.

4. Arguments in Support. The Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities, the sponsor of this bill, writes, "The Los Angeles County City Selection Committee has been unable to consistently reach quorums to fill elections to regional boards and commissions. It some cases this results in key appointments remaining vacant or unable to open for elections. We believe that the unique circumstances created by serving the largest county in the state, including traffic, distance, notification, and time of meetings contributes to the quorum challenges. AB 347 offers some flexibility to meet that challenge."

5. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0001395

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 347

Author: Chang (R)

Amended: 8/18/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/8/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Nguyen, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Moorlach, Pavley

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Local agencies: city selection committees: County of Los Angeles

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires specified city council members to serve as the voting member of the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee (Committee) when a mayor is unable to attend a meeting.

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/18/15 clarify that mayors in the County of Los Angeles will retain their authority under existing law to designate a proxy to attend and vote at city selection committee meetings in the mayor’s place.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes, in any county in which two or more cities are incorporated, a city selection committee for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law.

2. Provides that the membership of each city selection committee consists of the mayor of each city within the county.

3. Provides that, when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the city selection committee, he or she shall designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayor’s place.

This bill:

1. Provides that, for the Committee, the following shall apply when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee:

1. The vice mayor or mayor pro tempore shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote; and,

2. In the absence of the mayor and the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore, the next ranking council member shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote. The ranking council member shall be determined by seniority of service on the council.

2. Further provides that that mayors in the County of Los Angeles will retain their authority under existing law to designate a proxy to attend and vote at city selection committee meetings in the mayor’s place.

3. Finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the challenges faced as a result of the current governance structure of Los Angeles County.

Background

The Committee is composed of the mayors of each of the 88 cities within Los Angeles County; 45 or more mayors must be present at the Committee’s meetings to reach a quorum. Because mayors often get caught in traffic or cannot attend meetings for other reasons, the Committee has historically had trouble reaching a quorum. Even when an unavailable mayor designates an alternate to attend and vote at a Committee meeting in his or her place, the designated alternate is sometimes unable to attend. This situation has made it difficult for the Committee to function.

The Brown Act specifically allows local legislative bodies to use teleconferencing instead of meeting in person, but the size of Los Angeles County and the number of mayors (or alternates) needed to reach a quorum makes it impractical for the Committee to hold teleconference meetings instead of meeting in person.

Some Los Angeles County cities now propose changing state law to create a clear, statutorily defined line of succession in the event of a mayor’s inability to attend the meetings of the Committee.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. The Committee has been unable to consistently reach quorums to fill elections to regional boards and commissions. In some cases, this results in key appointments remaining vacant or unable to open for elections. Mayors and city council members in Los Angeles County face unique challenges including traffic, distance, notification, and time of meetings contributes to the quorum challenges. AB 347 offers some flexibility to meet that challenge.

2. Getting by. Existing law already requires an unavailable mayor to designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at a city selection committee meeting in the mayor’s place. If the Committee schedules its meetings with advanced notice, and mayors have permanently designated alternates, it is unclear why the Committee would still have difficulty meeting its quorum requirements.

Similarly, state law gives city selection committees the authority to formulate their own rules governing the time, place, and manner of their meetings. It is unclear that a change in state law is needed to allow the Committee to meet a quorum, when existing law permits the city selection committee to choose meeting locations, times, and formats most convenient for its members.

3. Special legislation. The California Constitution prohibits special legislation when a general law can apply (Article IV, §16). AB 347 contains findings and declarations explaining the need for legislation that applies only to the Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 7/10/15)

California Contract Cities Association

City of Avalon

City of Bellflower

City of Burbank

City of Cerritos

City of Claremont

City of Diamond Bar

City of Downey

City of Lakewood

City of La Mirada

City of Lomita

City of Malibu

City of Norwalk

City of Rosemead

City of Santa Fe Springs

City of Signal Hill

City of South Pasadena

City of Torrance

City of Walnut

City of Whittier

Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities

South Bay Cities Council of Governments

OPPOSITION: (Verified 7/10/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NO VOTE RECORDED: Linder, Medina

Prepared by: Toren Lewis / GOV. & F. / (916) 651-4119

8/19/15 20:49:25

**** END ****

 THIRD READING 

Bill No: AB 347

Author: Chang (R)

Amended: 3/26/15 in Assembly

Vote: 21

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/8/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Nguyen, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Moorlach, Pavley

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Local agencies: city selection committees: County of Los Angeles

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires specified city council members to serve as the voting member of the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee (Committee) when a mayor is unable to attend a meeting.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes, in any county in which two or more cities are incorporated, a city selection committee for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law.

2. Provides that the membership of each city selection committee consists of the mayor of each city within the county.

3. Provides that, when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the city selection committee, he or she shall designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayor’s place.

This bill:

1. Provides that, for the Committee, the following shall apply when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee:

1. The vice mayor or mayor pro tempore shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote; and,

2. In the absence of the mayor and the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore, the next ranking council member shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote. The ranking council member shall be determined by seniority of service on the council.

2. Finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the challenges faced as a result of the current governance structure of Los Angeles County.

Background

The Committee is composed of the mayors of each of the 88 cities within Los Angeles County; 45 or more mayors must be present at the Committee’s meetings to reach a quorum. Because mayors often get caught in traffic or cannot attend meetings for other reasons, the Committee has historically had trouble reaching a quorum. Even when an unavailable mayor designates an alternate to attend and vote at a Committee meeting in his or her place, the designated alternate is sometimes unable to attend. This situation has made it difficult for the Committee to function.

The Brown Act specifically allows local legislative bodies to use teleconferencing instead of meeting in person, but the size of Los Angeles County and the number of mayors (or alternates) needed to reach a quorum makes it impractical for the Committee to hold teleconference meetings instead of meeting in person.

Some Los Angeles County cities now propose changing state law to create a clear, statutorily defined line of succession in the event of a mayor’s inability to attend the meetings of the Committee.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. The Committee has been unable to consistently reach quorums to fill elections to regional boards and commissions. In some cases, this results in key appointments remaining vacant or unable to open for elections. Mayors and city council members in Los Angeles County face unique challenges including traffic, distance, notification, and time of meetings contributes to the quorum challenges. AB 347 offers some flexibility to meet that challenge.

2. Getting by. Existing law already requires an unavailable mayor to designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at a city selection committee meeting in the mayor’s place. If the Committee schedules its meetings with advanced notice, and mayors have permanently designated alternates, it is unclear why the Committee would still have difficulty meeting its quorum requirements.

Similarly, state law gives city selection committees the authority to formulate their own rules governing the time, place, and manner of their meetings. It is unclear that a change in state law is needed to allow the Committee to meet a quorum, when existing law permits the city selection committee to choose meeting locations, times, and formats most convenient for its members.

3. Special legislation. The California Constitution prohibits special legislation when a general law can apply (Article IV, §16). AB 347 contains findings and declarations explaining the need for legislation that applies only to the Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 7/10/15)

California Contract Cities Association

City of Avalon

City of Bellflower

City of Burbank

City of Cerritos

City of Claremont

City of Diamond Bar

City of Downey

City of Lakewood

City of La Mirada

City of Lomita

City of Malibu

City of Norwalk

City of Rosemead

City of Santa Fe Springs

City of Signal Hill

City of South Pasadena

City of Torrance

City of Walnut

City of Whittier

Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities

South Bay Cities Council of Governments

OPPOSITION: (Verified 7/10/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NO VOTE RECORDED: Linder, Medina

Prepared by: Toren Lewis / Gov. & Fin / (916) 651-4119

7/16/15 9:08:03

**** END ****

 THIRD READING 

Bill No: AB 347

Author: Chang (R)

Amended: 3/26/15 in Assembly

Vote: 21

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/8/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Nguyen, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Moorlach, Pavley

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Local agencies: city selection committees: County of Los Angeles

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires specified city council members to serve as the voting member of the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee (Committee) when a mayor is unable to attend a meeting.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes, in any county in which two or more cities are incorporated, a city selection committee for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law.

2. Provides that the membership of each city selection committee consists of the mayor of each city within the county.

3. Provides that, when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the city selection committee, he or she shall designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayor’s place.

This bill:

1. Provides that, for the Committee, the following shall apply when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee:

1. The vice mayor or mayor pro tempore shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote; and,

2. In the absence of the mayor and the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore, the next ranking council member shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote. The ranking council member shall be determined by seniority of service on the council.

2. Finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the challenges faced as a result of the current governance structure of Los Angeles County.

Background

The Committee is composed of the mayors of each of the 88 cities within Los Angeles County; 45 or more mayors must be present at the Committee’s meetings to reach a quorum. Because mayors often get caught in traffic or cannot attend meetings for other reasons, the Committee has historically had trouble reaching a quorum. Even when an unavailable mayor designates an alternate to attend and vote at a Committee meeting in his or her place, the designated alternate is sometimes unable to attend. This situation has made it difficult for the Committee to function.

The Brown Act specifically allows local legislative bodies to use teleconferencing instead of meeting in person, but the size of Los Angeles County and the number of mayors (or alternates) needed to reach a quorum makes it impractical for the Committee to hold teleconference meetings instead of meeting in person.

Some Los Angeles County cities now propose changing state law to create a clear, statutorily defined line of succession in the event of a mayor’s inability to attend the meetings of the Committee.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. The Committee has been unable to consistently reach quorums to fill elections to regional boards and commissions. In some cases, this results in key appointments remaining vacant or unable to open for elections. Mayors and city council members in Los Angeles County face unique challenges including traffic, distance, notification, and time of meetings contributes to the quorum challenges. AB 347 offers some flexibility to meet that challenge.

2. Getting by. Existing law already requires an unavailable mayor to designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at a city selection committee meeting in the mayor’s place. If the Committee schedules its meetings with advanced notice, and mayors have permanently designated alternates, it is unclear why the Committee would still have difficulty meeting its quorum requirements.

Similarly, state law gives city selection committees the authority to formulate their own rules governing the time, place, and manner of their meetings. It is unclear that a change in state law is needed to allow the Committee to meet a quorum, when existing law permits the city selection committee to choose meeting locations, times, and formats most convenient for its members.

3. Special legislation. The California Constitution prohibits special legislation when a general law can apply (Article IV, §16). AB 347 contains findings and declarations explaining the need for legislation that applies only to the Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 7/10/15)

California Contract Cities Association

City of Avalon

City of Bellflower

City of Burbank

City of Cerritos

City of Claremont

City of Diamond Bar

City of Downey

City of Lakewood

City of La Mirada

City of Lomita

City of Malibu

City of Norwalk

City of Rosemead

City of Santa Fe Springs

City of Signal Hill

City of South Pasadena

City of Torrance

City of Walnut

City of Whittier

Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities

South Bay Cities Council of Governments

OPPOSITION: (Verified 7/10/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NO VOTE RECORDED: Linder, Medina

Prepared by: Toren Lewis / Gov. & Fin / (916) 651-4119

7/10/15 17:07:26

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE

Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Local agencies: city selection committees

Requires specified city council members to serve as the voting member of the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee when a mayor is unable to attend a meeting.

Background and Existing Law

State law creates a “city selection committee” in counties that have two or more cities, composed of all of the mayors in that county, to appoint city members to boards and commissions. Each city appoints an elected official as its delegate to the city selection committee, usually its mayor. A quorum of a majority of cities on a city selection must be present at a meeting for the committee to vote. When the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the selection committee, state law requires the mayor to designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayor’s place.

The Los Angeles County City Selection Committee is composed of the mayors of each of the 88 cities within Los Angeles County; 45 or more mayors must be present at the City Selection Committee’s meetings to reach a quorum. Because mayors often get caught in traffic or cannot attend meetings for other reasons, the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee has historically had trouble reaching a quorum. Even when an unavailable mayor designates an alternate to attend and vote at a Committee meeting in his or her place, the designated alternate is sometimes unable to attend. This situation has made it difficult for the committee to function.

The Brown Act specifically allows local legislative bodies to use teleconferencing instead of meeting in person, but the size of Los Angeles County and the number of mayors (or alternates) needed to reach a quorum makes it impractical for the committee to hold teleconference meetings instead of meeting in person.

Some Los Angeles County cities now propose changing state law to create a clear, statutorily defined line of succession in the event of a mayor’s inability to attend the meetings of the Los Angeles County’s City Selection Committee.

Proposed Law

Assembly Bill 347 provides that, for the City Selection Committee in the County of Los Angeles, the following applies when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee:

• Either the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore serve as the voting member and is entitled to one vote; and,

• In the absence of the mayor and the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore, the next ranking council member, determined by seniority of service, serves as the voting member and is entitled to one vote. .

State Revenue Impact

No estimate.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. The Los Angeles County City Selection Committee has been unable to consistently reach quorums to fill elections to regional boards and commissions. In some cases, this results in key appointments remaining vacant or unable to open for elections. Mayors and city council members in Los Angeles County face unique challenges including traffic, distance, notification, and time of meetings contributes to the quorum challenges. AB 347 offers some flexibility to meet that challenge."

2. Getting by. Existing law already requires an unavailable mayor to designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at a city selection committee meeting in the mayor’s place. If the committee schedules its meetings with advanced notice, and mayors have permanently designated alternates, it is unclear why the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee would still have difficulty meeting its quorum requirements.

Similarly, state law gives city selection committees the authority to formulate their own rules governing the time, place, and manner of their meetings. It is unclear that a change in state law is needed to allow the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee to meet a quorum, when existing law permits the committee to choose meeting locations, times, and formats most convenient for its members.

3. Special legislation. The California Constitution prohibits special legislation when a general law can apply (Article IV, §16). AB 347 contains findings and declarations explaining the need for legislation that applies only to the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee.

Assembly Actions

Assembly Local Government 9-0

Assembly Floor 78-0

Support and Opposition

(7/8/15)

Support: California Contract Cities Association; Cities of Avalon, Bellflower, Burbank, Cerritos, Claremont, Diamond Bar, Downey, Lakewood, La Mirada, Lomita, Malibu, Norwalk, Rosemead, Santa Fe Springs, Signal Hill, South Pasadena, Torrance, Walnut, and Whittier; Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities; South Bay Cities Council of Governments.

Opposition: Unknown.

-- END --

Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Brian Maienschein, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 347

Author:(Chang) – As Amended Ver:March 26, 2015

SUBJECT: Local agencies: city selection committees: County of Los Angeles.

SUMMARY: Requires specified city council members to serve as the voting member of the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee when a mayor is unable to attend a meeting. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that, for the City Selection Committee (Committee) in the County of Los Angeles (L.A. County), the following shall apply when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee:

1. The vice mayor or mayor pro tempore shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote; and,

2. In the absence of the mayor and the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore, the next ranking council member shall serve as the voting member and shall be entitled to one vote. The ranking council member shall be determined by seniority of service on the council.

2. Finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the challenges faced as a result of the current governance structure of L.A. County.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes, in any county in which two or more cities are incorporated, a Committee for the purpose of appointing city representatives to boards, commissions, and agencies as required by law.

2. Provides that the membership of each Committee consists of the mayor of each city within the county.

3. Provides that, when the mayor is unable to attend a meeting of the Committee, he or she shall designate another member of the city’s legislative body to attend and vote at the meeting in the mayor’s place.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS:

1. Bill Summary. This bill provides an alternative method for ensuring replacement members for L.A. County's Committee when a mayor is unable to attend. Instead of requiring the mayor to designate another city council member to attend and vote in his or her stead, the bill provides that the vice mayor or mayor pro tempore shall serve as the voting member. When neither of those officials can attend, the next ranking council member shall serve as the voting member. The ranking council member is determined by seniority of service on the council. This bill is sponsored by the Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities.

2. Author's Statement. According to the author, "Los Angeles County has 88 cities, spanning 4,000 square miles. Los Angeles County’s City Selection Committee must meet in person and requires a quorum of 45 cities to vote. Over the years, Los Angeles County’s City Selection Committee has been unable to reach consistent quorums to fill the appointments, leading to frustration by mayors and councilmembers and in some cases, vacancies that remained open for years. Changing the proxy designation would allow Los Angeles County’s City Selection Committee to increase those eligible from each city to meet the necessary quorum."

3. Background. Existing law creates a Committee in each county with two or more incorporated cities for the purpose of appointing city representatives to such boards, commissions and agencies as may be required by law. Committee membership is comprised of the mayor from each city in the county. Existing law requires the mayor to designate another member of the city council to serve as a replacement if the mayor is unable to attend a Committee meeting. This requirement has hampered the ability of L.A. County's Committee to achieve a quorum.

4. Arguments in Support. The Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities, the sponsor of this bill, writes, "The Los Angeles County City Selection Committee has been unable to consistently reach quorums to fill elections to regional boards and commissions. It some cases this results in key appointments remaining vacant or unable to open for elections. We believe that the unique circumstances created by serving the largest county in the state, including traffic, distance, notification, and time of meetings contributes to the quorum challenges. AB 347 offers some flexibility to meet that challenge."

5. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Contract Cities Association

Cities of Bellflower, Cerritos, Claremont, Diamond Bar, Downey, Lakewood, La Mirada,

Norwalk, Rosemead, Signal Hill, Torrance, and Walnut

Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958