AgdaPkt 2007-10-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8A Page 7 American Planning Association are supporting the bill (last year they opposed). In addition, the Governor has his own Homeless Initiative, which includes an element to improve the siting opportunities for shelters around the state. Regardless, this is a bill to watch. If signed, S8 2 will need to be incorporated into the next housing element change, or if it is vetoed, Sen. Cedillo will introduce the bill again next year. For more information on the issue, contact League Legislative Representative Bill Higgins at bhiqqins@cacities.orq. League Legislative Briefings Scheduled for November The League of California Cities is hosting two briefing sessions in November. Scheduled for Wednesday, Nov. 28, in Pasadena and Thursday, Nov. 29, in San Jose, these identical briefings will focus on bills of note to city officials that passed in the previous legislative session. Tentative session topics will include: · Implementation of the State Infrastructure Bond Package · The fate of ACA 8 and pending initiatives-What's next on eminent domain and regulatory takings . Climate Change: ARB Regulations, sa 375 (Steinberg), the attorney general's lawsuits, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines: Are your ready for this kind of "green heat?" · Growing Pains: Legislation affecting redevelopment, flood control. environmental issues. housing and land use . Employee relations and workers compensation · Sex offender management, gang abatement. and prison overcrowding: local implications The cost of attendance is $140, which includes a luncheon. Registration and further information is available at YoJvYY.!'"cacitj~.org/event~. Legal Decision May Have a Profound Effect on Collective Bargaining The collective bargaining process in California may be fundamentally altered. if the California Supreme Court declines to review Lexin v. Superior Court. The case arose out of a decision by the San Diego Employees' Retirement System (SDCERS) board of administration to approve an increase in pension benefits for city employees and at the same time. allowed the pension fund to be underfunded. The San Diego County District Attorney brought a criminal proceeding against the certain members of the board, alleging a violation of Government Code section 1090. Section 1090 is a draconian state law that prohibits a public official or employee from participating in a public agency decision in which the official or employee has a financial interest. In Lexin. the district attorney argued that the board members who are public employees have an indirect financial interest in the decision to increase the pension benefits because they are members of the bargaining units that would be affected by the change to the benefits. The board members argued in response that their decision fell within the salary exception to section 1090. which provides that participating in a decision affecting the official or employees own salary does not constitute a 1090 violation. The board members argued that pension benefits are a component of their salary, and therefore. their participation in decision affecting their pension benefits would fall within the salary exception. The 4th District Court of Appeal did agree that pension benefits are part of an employee's salary for purposes of the salary exception. The Court noted, however, that the salary exception 7