AgdaPkt 2008-06-23 Clsd and Special

Browse Search

. I" ....~ ~ 8A Page 3 of 7 nothing in this existing code section that would prevent a government-owned utility from making the decision to switch technologies or pursue a different resource mix. The diverse group of organizations that oppose this measure include: the Natural Resources Defense Gouncil, the California League of Conservation Voters, the California Small Business Association, California Municipal Utilities Association, Coalition of California Utility Employees, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Locals 47, 1245 and 9th District, California Chamber of Commerce, PG&E, Sempra, Southern California Edison and the California Solar Energy Industries Association. The League will continue to monitor the Solar and Clean Energy Act of 2008 and will provide updates through the League's Web site and Priority Focus. 'Housing Bill' Continued from Page 1... Because this funding would be allocated for the fiscal year ending June 30, AS 1252 is expected to be heard June 16 by the Senate Appropriations Committee due to its urgency. The bill also has the added benefit of invigorating the economy at a time when California is experiencing great economic strain. Promoting infill and TOO contributes to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. For FY 2007-08, the Legislature appropriated $240 million from the I nfi II Incentives Grant Program and $95 million for TOO. However, the applications submitted for this initial appropriation significantly outstripped the appropriated funds. In fact, the Infilllnfrastructure Fund received 124 applications that exceeded $1 billion-four times the amount of the original $240 million. Applications for TOO funding were five times greater than the allocated $95 million. Take Action! o Cities with applications pending for these Prop. 1 C funds are urged to submit support letters to . their senator. The League's letter of support can be found online at www.cacities.orq/billsearch. Plug in AS 1252 to pull up the letter. Conflict Over Labor Dispute Jurisdictions May Go to Supreme Court Last March, Priority Focus reported on a case in which California's Sixth District Court of Appeal concluded that the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) has exclusive initial jurisdiction over labor disputes between public agencies and their employees whose job duties are essential to preserving pUblic health and safety. The Sixth District's decision was disappointing to local governments that want the option of going to court in lieu of PERB when a dispute arises. Recently, however, another California appellate court-the First District-examined this same issue and ruled the opposite: PERB does not have exclusive initial jurisdiction over these types of disputes. Rather, local governments may bypass PERB and go directly to the courts when a planned strike threatens public health and safety. In this recent case, County of Contra Costa v. Public Employees Union Local One, the county sued several public employee unions to prevent certain "essential employees" from participating in a one-day strike. The trial court granted the county's request for a temporary restraining order, thereby preventing approximately 160 employees from striking, including airport operations specialists, animal service workers, probation counselors, and various county hospital workers. The PERS intervened, arguing that it had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter because the proposed strike was "arguably protected or prohibited by the [Meyers-Milias-Brown Act]." one of the statutes PERB is charged with enforcing. o The appellate court disagreed. Instead, the court sided with the county and concluded that because the county did not allege any "unfair practice" under the Meyers-Milias-Brown-Act, which is a prerequisite for PERS jurisdiction, the county was free to go straight to court to seek an order protecting the public from imminent threats to health and safety. 3