AgdaPkt 2002-08-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

IZ.A Legislative Bill Action expose themselves to lawsuits. Property owners The League's City Attorneys Department, in desiring these changes will most likely be asked to conjunction with their county colleagues in the County identify the other property in the community that will Counsels~ Association, worked extensively on AB 363, be up-zoned for housing. Staff: Dan Carrigg, Status: as well as the State Bar proceeding that led to the bill. SenJud;Hrg-8/13, Position: Oppose. The League and the County Counsels' Association requested several important amendments that were AB 1866 0Nright). Preemption of Local Author- accepted by the author. Based on the recommendation ity. Second Units and Density Bonuses. AB 1866 of the city attorneys; at their July meeting, the League prohibits a local government from exercising any Board of Directors adopted a support position on A..~B discretionary review when approving a second unit, and 363. converts state density bonus law into a legal quagmire. The bill has been placed on the Senate Appropriations Both the League and the County Counsels' Associa- Committee Suspense file due to the excessive costs of tion believe that AB 363 is a bill that deserves support the state mandates contained in the bill. It is unclear if by public agency attorneys, city officials and the the bill will be released from the Committee, Local Legislature. By laying out a sppcific procedure that a governments opposing the bill, who are represented by public attorney must take before breaching attorney- a senator on the Senate Appropriations Committee, can client confidentiality, Staff: Yvonne Hunter, Status: help by calling their senator and asking that the bill SenFIr, Position: Support. remain on Suspense. Staff: Dan Carrigg, Status: SenApps-Suspense File, Position: Oppose. ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATIVE AB 23S1 (Canciamilla). Water Quality. Manda- tory Minimum Penalties. The amendments to A.~B AB 363 (Steinberg). Public Agency Attorneys. 2351 that were taken in the Senate Environmental Attorney-Client Confidentiality. AB 363, continued Quality Committee in early July are now in print. With over from last year, addresses the important issue of these amendments, all environmental groups have attorney-client confidentiality for public agency attor- removed their opposition. AB 2951, sponsored by the neys. As amended, it passed the Senate Judiciary League and the California Association of Sanitation Committee this week. The bill authorizes a public Agencies, would make modest Changes to existing law agency attorney who learns of improper governmental that requires regional water quality control boards to activity to take one or both of the following actions: impose mandatory minimam penalties for certain types (a) urge reconsideration of the matter while explaining of waste water system6 violations, To date, AB 2351 its likely consequences to the organization; and (b) has received no "NO" votes, Cities that have not refer the matter up to the highest internal authority already notified their Assembly Members and Senators that can act on behalf of the organization. AB 3(;~ also of their support should do so soon. Staff: Yvonne authorizes the attorney, under very specific conditions, Hunter, Status: SenApps, Position: Support/Co- to directly refer the matter to the law enforcement sponsor. agency or official charged with oversight of the governmental organization. It is important to note that SB 1523 (Sher). E-Waste. SB 152:] establishes an the bill wouldn't require the attorney to report im- advance disposal fee and funding program for collection proper governmental behavior. Rather, it would protect and recycling of e-waste (specifically, cathode ray tubes the attorney from disciplinary action if the attorney or CRTs--computer monitors and televisions). The bill follows the specific procedures and criteria in the bill, will be amended back to its previous form, with some PAGE 8/PRIORITY FOCUS Visit the League's Official Web Site--www.cacities.org