Best Best & Krieger News Feed Best and Krieger is a Full Service Law Firmen-us30 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800firmwise and Referendums<p>BB&amp;K Partner Kara Ueda will be among the presenters at the League of California Cities&rsquo; New Law &amp; Elections Seminar<span>, which will be held Dec. 3-5, 2014. She will provide an overview of the initiative process, including the roles of city clerks, city attorneys, city councils and initiative proponents, as well as considerations for potential and actual litigation.</span></p> <p><b>When<br /> </b>Dec. 4, 2014<br /> 1:45-5 p.m.</p> <p><b>Where<br /> </b>Hyatt Regency Monterey</p> <p>For more information or to register for the conference, visit the LCC&rsquo;s City Clerks New Law &amp; Elections Seminar page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements04 Dec 2014 00:00:00 -0800 of Truth: One State, One Water Future<p>BB&amp;K Partner Eric Garner will be the keynote speaker and Partner Kelly Salt will be a panelist at the Association of California Water Agencies 2014 Fall Conference &amp; Exhibition Dec. 2-5.</p> <p>Kelly will be discussing &quot;Fairness and Equity in Recycled Water Rates&quot; on Wed., Dec. 3, from 2 - 3:15 p.m.</p> <p>Eric will present &quot;Groundwater Legislation: History in the Making or Another Dead End?&quot; at the luncheon on Thurs., Dec. 4, from 11:45 a.m. - 1:15 p.m. Statewide regulation of groundwater is one of the most important &ndash; and controversial &ndash; challenges facing this generation of water managers. That&rsquo;s why the groundwater legislation passed this year is so important, whether you were for it or not. This once-in-a-century statute will change how water is managed in California.</p> For more information or to register, visit the ACWA event page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.Conferences & Speaking Engagements02 Dec 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Courts, The Hill and The FCC - A Year in Review and Setting the Stage for 2015<p>BB&amp;K Partner Gerard Lavery Lederer will be on a teleconference panel speaking about &ldquo;The Courts, The Hill and The FCC &ndash; A Year in Review and Setting the Stage for 2015&rdquo; presented by the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors.</p> <p><strong>When:</strong><br /> Monday, Dec. 1, 2014</p> <p>For more information or to register, visit the NATOA website events page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here.</span></a></p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements01 Dec 2014 00:00:00 -0800 1825 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training (November 18)<div>California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, pursuant to AB 1825, requires that employers with fifty or more employees in California provide at least two hours of Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training every two years to any employee that has a supervisory role in operations. This presentation is designed to satisfy those requirements.<br /> <br /> Joseph Ortiz will present the training from the Riverside office. All other BB&amp;K offices will participate in the training via state-of-the-art video conferencing. The video conference is interactive, allowing attendees to ask questions and participate in other ways.<br /> <br /> <a href=";oseq=&amp;c=&amp;ch="><span style="color: rgb(0,0,255)"><strong>Click Here</strong></span></a> to Register<br /> <br /> <p><strong>What will be&nbsp;covered:</strong></p> <ul type="disc"> <li>What constitutes sexual harassment or discrimination in the workplace</li> <li>How to recognize and avoid it</li> <li>What procedures to follow if you witness harassment or are harassed yourself</li> <li>The potential consequences - including personal liability - of sexual harassment</li> </ul> <p><strong><br /> Audience:</strong></p> <ul type="disc"> <li>Supervisors</li> <li>Human Resources Professionals</li> <li>Public Officials</li> <li>Managers &amp; Private Business Professionals with 50 or More Employees</li> </ul> <p><br /> <strong>Registration:<br /> </strong><br /> The training will be&nbsp;held via video conference at the following BB&amp;K offices throughout California.</p> <ul> <li><a target="_blank" href=";L=60&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Indian Wells </span></a></li> <li><a target="_top" href=";L=61&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Irvine </span></a></li> <li><a target="_top" href=";L=62&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Los Angeles </span></a></li> <li><a target="_top" href=";L=59&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Ontario </span></a></li> <li><a target="_blank" href=";L=63&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Riverside</span></a> &ndash; Joseph Ortiz will present from the Riverside office</li> <li><a target="_blank" href=";L=64&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Sacramento </span></a></li> <li><a target="_blank" href=";L=65&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">San Diego </span></a></li> <li><a target="_blank" href=";L=66&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Walnut Creek </span></a></li> </ul> <strong><br /> Cost:</strong><br /> <br /> $75 per person<br /> <br /> <br type="_moz" /> <strong>When: <br /> </strong><br /> Tuesday, November 18<br /> 9 - 11 a.m.</div> <p><strong>BB&amp;K Presenter:<br /> <br /> </strong>Joseph Ortiz, Partner, Labor &amp; Employment Practice Group in Riverside office<br /> <br /> <strong>QUESTIONS:<br /> <br /> </strong>Contact&nbsp;<a href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Jessy Asfahan</span></a> if you have any questions about this event and/or about BB&amp;K upcoming seminars/events.<br /> <br /> If you are not currently receiving our Legal Alerts and would like to be added to our email distribution list, please visit our <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: rgb(0,0,255)">subscription page</span></a>.<br /> &nbsp;</p>Seminars and Webinars18 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Works in Conservation: Tools for Rethinking Water, Quantifying Value, and Thriving in our Landscapes<p>Best Best &amp; Krieger is proud to sponsor and participate in the 69th Annual California Resource Conservation Districts Meeting &amp; Conference. The event will be held Nov. 12 &ndash; 14, 2014 in Ventura, Calif. Highlighting the key conservation issues in Southern California, participants will share ideas on what works in conservation and have the opportunity to advance statewide partnerships.</p> <p><strong>BB&amp;K Speakers</strong></p> <p>Thurs., Nov. 13, 2014<br /> 3 &ndash; 4:15 p.m.<br /> &ldquo;Rethinking Water: Strategies to Build an Equitable, Reliable, and Clean Water Source&rdquo;<br /> <b>Steven Anderson</b> will discuss the recent groundwater legislation.</p> <p>Fri., Nov. 14, 2014<br /> 8:30 &ndash; 9:30 a.m.<br /> &ldquo;Support for New Conservation Properties and Beginning Agricultural Professionals&rdquo;<br /> <b>Steven G. Martin</b> and <b>Ward Simmons</b> will discuss due diligence for conservation properties.</p> <p>Fri., Nov. 14, 2014<br /> 8:30 &ndash; 9:30 a.m.<br /> &ldquo;Creating Healthy CityScapes: Building Partnerships to Address Regional and Specific Urban Conservation Storm Water Management: Working with Cities to Relieve Regulatory Pressure&rdquo;<br /> <b>Shawn Haggerty</b> will discuss municipalities and water quality.</p> <p><strong>Where:</strong><br /> Crowne Plaza Ventura Beach<br /> For more information or to register, please visit the CARCD event page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements13 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 of Wireless Facilities<p>BB&amp;K telecommunications law attorneys <b>Joseph Van Eaton</b> and <b>Gerard Lederer</b>, who is also a co-chair of the program, will be among the featured speakers at this two-day conference titled &ldquo;Deployment of Wireless Facilities: Adapting to New Technologies, FCC Rules, State Legislative Developments and a Major Supreme Court Decision.&rdquo;</p> <p>This year has seen explosive mobile industry growth. Smartphones, &quot;apps,&quot; social media and streaming video are all creating unprecedented demand for mobile broadband, both services and infrastructure. This conference addresses the practical, legal, economic and regulatory issues applicable to providers, local governments, building landlords, private property owners and others that arise from this explosion in the growth of mobile wireless services, and the infrastructure that makes these services possible.</p> <p>This advanced conference will examine the changing business of mobile and wireless communications services and its impact on the increased demand for, and design of, wireless facilities. Topics to be discussed include state and federal regulations and statutes that define the rights and responsibilities of mobile service providers, local governments and property owners when it comes to site, and modifying towers and antennas. Panelists will also discuss deal points associated with the deployment and modification of cell sites, towers, and other facilities' access.</p> <p>The conference will also be webcast live.<br /> <br /> <i>BB&amp;K clients and colleagues receive $100 off registration.</i></p> <p><b>BB&amp;K Speakers</b><br /> Gerard Lederer<br /> Thursday, Nov. 13, 2014<br /> 8:30 a.m.<br /> &ldquo;Introduction to Day 1: Demand Factors for New Infrastructure and New Regulatory Developments&rdquo;<br /> The big events relating to local permitting of wireless telecommunications facilities and how they fit together: Case law; the FCC &quot;shot clock&quot; ruling and Supreme Court case; Section 6409 (a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief Act and follow-on court decisions.</p> <p>Joseph Van Eaton<br /> Thursday, Nov. 13, 2014<br /> 3:15 p.m.<br /> &ldquo;Other Items on the Changing Federal and State Legal Landscape for Deployment of Wireless Facilities: What Are the New Rules of the Road?&rdquo;<br /> Overview of recent federal court cases including T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell; other litigation developments; FCC regulatory initiatives; local government perspective on the implications.</p> <p>Gerard Lederer<br /> Friday, Nov. 14, 2014<br /> 10:15 a.m.<br /> &ldquo;Carrier Access to Buildings and Other Structures: Best Practices for Negotiating Lease Terms with the Landlord&rdquo;<br /> Carrier and building owner perspectives on getting to yes for wireless facilities leases</p> <p>BB&amp;K is also co-sponsoring a reception for faculty and attendees on Thursday, Nov. 13, 2014 at 5 p.m.</p> <p><b>Continuing Education Credits</b><br /> Live credits: This program qualifies for 10.3 GA CLE credits. Upon request, event organizers will apply for, or help you apply for, CLE credits in other states and other types of credits.</p> <p><b>Location</b><br /> Hilton Garden Inn Atlanta Midtown<br /> 97 10th Street NW<br /> Atlanta, GA 30309</p> <p>For more information or to register, please visit Law Seminars International&rsquo;s event page by clicking <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements13 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 FCC Rules Will Require New Approach to Siting of Wireless Facilities<p>The FCC is scheduled to adopt new rules at its Oct. 17 meeting that are likely to require changes in the way local governments respond to applications for siting wireless towers, and for adding antennas to, and modifying, existing structures. The rules could necessitate an immediate review and revision of wireless siting ordinances in many communities, and have important implications for the way states and localities deal with siting of wireless facilities in historic districts and environmentally sensitive areas. The change in the rules may also affect the approach of public agencies, schools, special districts and local governments to leasing of their own property</p> <p>In a free webinar, <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=456&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K telecommunications</span></a> attorneys and their&nbsp;co-sponsor, the&nbsp;American Planning Association, will provide an overview of the new rules, the timetable for responding to them, and the challenges and opportunities facing public bodies as they attempt to protect local interests, while complying with federal requirements governing zoning of wireless facilities.</p> <p><strong>The webinar will cover: </strong></p> <ul type="disc"> <li>The FCC's new rules, which are expected to affect both the substance and the process associated with wireless siting</li> <li>The effect of the new rules on contracts for use of publicly owned property</li> <li>The legal issues raised by the rules and what local governments need to do if they wish to challenge, or obtain clarification of, the rules</li> <li>Ways local governments can respond to the rules that provide the maximum protection to the public&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</li> </ul> <p><strong>Who should&nbsp;attend:</strong></p> <ul type="disc"> <li>Municipal attorneys responsible for zoning matters or right-of-way</li> <li>Directors of planning/public works</li> <li>Members of zoning boards/elected officials</li> <li>Department heads responsible for leasing public property&nbsp;</li> </ul> <br /> <strong>When</strong>:<br /> Wednesday, Nov. 5<br /> 10 - 11 a.m. PT<br /> 1 - 2 p.m. ET<br /> <br /> To RSVP click <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">here.</span></a><br /> <br /> <strong>Contact Person:<br /> </strong>Jessy Asfahan,&nbsp;Best Best &amp; Krieger<br /> <a href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">;</span></a><span style="color: #0000ff"><br /> </span><br type="_moz" />Seminars and Webinars05 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 in Drought: Development, Legislation and Litigation<p>BB&amp;K Managing Partner <b>Eric Garner</b>, who is the program chair of the event, and Partners <b>Paeter Garcia</b> and <b>Kelly Salt</b> will be participating in some of the panel discussions during this day-long seminar. This year is being touted as California&rsquo;s single driest year on record and severe drought conditions have brought the state to a crossroads. Is drought now going to be the new normal in California? This program will help attendees understand the impacts of drought on the competing needs of urban, agricultural and environmental water users. A diverse group of water leaders from state and local government, water associations, the legislature and engineers and attorneys will provide their insight on the legal and policy issues facing the state&rsquo;s surface water, groundwater and alternative water supplies. Come and discover how California&rsquo;s drought is creating challenges and prompting new solutions for water resource management.</p> <p><b>BB&amp;K Speakers:</b><br /> <br /> Eric Garner will deliver the event&rsquo;s opening introduction and overview at 9 a.m. At 11:30 a.m., he will moderate the discussion &ldquo;The Groundwater Conundrum,&rdquo; which will explore the following topics:</p> <ul> <li>Groundwater Use in an Arid State (Availability, Rights, Uses, Reserves and Overdraft)</li> <li>Whiskey is for Drinking (Adjudications Past, Present and Future)</li> <li>Common Ground (Groundwater Management Plans; Special Legislation; State Oversight)</li> </ul> <p>Paeter Garcia will appear as a panelist at 3 p.m. for a discussion titled, &ldquo;The Perfect Non-Storm: Permitting Development in Drought Conditions.&rdquo; Topics to be discussed include:</p> <ul> <li>California Growth and Related Development</li> <li>Tall Task for Water Supply Planning (Urban Water Management Plans; General Plans)</li> <li>Preparing Defensible Water Supply Analyses (Water Supply Assessments; Written Verifications; CEQA Analysis)</li> </ul> <p>Kelly Salt is participating on a panel at 4 p.m. called, &ldquo;Pricing the Way through a Water Shortage.&rdquo; Issues to be covered include:</p> <ul> <li>Declaring Water Shortage and Emergency Conditions (Ordinances, Conservation, Rationing)</li> <li>Pricing Structures and Challenges</li> <li>Public Issue with Private Implications</li> </ul> <p><b>Credits: </b><br /> <br /> CA CLE: 6.25 General CLE credits<br /> CDPH: 6.0 contact hours</p> <p><b>Topics Covered: </b></p> <ul> <li>Drought Response</li> <li>Environmental</li> <li>Groundwater Use and Management</li> <li>Stormwater and Greywater</li> <li>Water Purchases and Transfers</li> <li>Water Shortage and Emergency Conditions</li> </ul> <p><b>Who Should Attend:</b></p> <ul> <li>Attorneys/Legal Staff</li> <li>State and Municipal Officials</li> <li>Water Operators</li> <li>Developers/Land Owners</li> <li>Farmers/Ranchers</li> <li>Environmentalists</li> <li>Utility Managers</li> <li>Planners</li> </ul> <p><b>Where: </b><br /> <br /> DoubleTree by Hilton LA Downtown<br /> 120 S. Los Angeles St.<br /> Los Angeles, CA 90012</p> <p>For more information or to register, please click <a target="_blank" href=""><u><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></u></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements30 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800, Developments, and Best Practices Relevant to Drafting Employment Agreements<p>Joseph T. Ortiz, a Best Best &amp; Krieger partner, wrote a chapter titled &ldquo;Trends, Developments, and Best Practices Relevant to Drafting Employment Agreements&rdquo; for <a target="_blank" href=";ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1414088788&amp;sr=1-1-fkmr0&amp;keywords=aspatore+employment+agreements+2014+ortiz"><font color="#0000ff">&ldquo;Negotiating and Drafting Employment Agreements, 2014: Leading Lawyers on Constructing Effective Employment Contracts (Inside the Minds),&rdquo;</font></a> published by Aspatore. &ldquo;The book provides an authoritative, insider's perspective on developing clear, flexible, and enforceable agreements to protect employers in today's marketplace,&rdquo; according to the publication&rsquo;s description on</p>Publications29 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Access to Public Rights-of-Way<p>Join BB&amp;K attorneys Gail Karish and Matthew Schettenhelm at Lorman Education Services&rsquo; &ldquo;Private Access to Public Rights-of-Way.&rdquo; During this webinar, you will learn to increase your proficiency in the private use of rights-of-ways and be provided a useful introduction to the challenges facing local governments as more private providers seek to use the public rights-of-way for a variety of purposes. Public officials, private service providers and lawyers will benefit from understanding the variety of existing and emerging users and uses, the options available for securing access to public rights-of-way and the duties and liabilities related to their use.</p> <p>By using <a target="_blank" href=";p=13389&amp;s=direct"><span style="color: #0000ff">this link to register</span></a>, BB&amp;K guests receive 50 percent off registration.</p> <p><b>When</b><br /> Oct. 29, 014<br /> 10 &ndash; 11:30 a.m. (PST)<br /> <br /> Continuing Education credits are available.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements29 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Requirements of Filing Officers and Officials<p>BB&amp;K Senior Paralegal Dianna Valdez will host a training&nbsp;on the statutory duties of public agency filing officers and officials regarding Form 700 Statements of Economic Interests (SEIs).</p> <p><strong>This informative seminar will discuss:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Legislative &amp; Regulatory Changes</li> <li>General Rules - What's Your Role? <ul type="circle"> <li>Types of Public Officials - PRA vs. CIC</li> <li>Disclosure Requirements - Full vs. Limited</li> </ul> </li> <li>Guidelines - Notices, Fines &amp; Waivers</li> <li>Reviews - Facial vs. Full <ul type="circle"> <li>What to Look For - Common Errors</li> </ul> </li> <li>Public Access - Within Two Days</li> <li>Enforcement - Reporting Apparent Violations</li> <li>Records &amp; Retention</li> <li>What February 1 Deadline?</li> </ul> <p><strong>Who should attend:</strong></p> <ul type="disc"> <li>Filing officers and their assistants for: <ul type="circle"> <li>School Districts</li> <li>Special Districts</li> <li>Cities</li> <li>Counties</li> </ul> </li> </ul> <strong>When:</strong><br /> Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2014<br /> 8:30 a.m. - Check-in &amp; Pastries<br /> 9 - 11:30 a.m. - Training<br /> <p><strong>Where:</strong><br /> The training will be held&nbsp;at&nbsp;<span style="color: #0000ff"><a target="_blank" href="">BB&amp;K offices</a></span> throughout California. When you register you will select where you will attend the training.</p> <p><strong>Per Person Cost: $125</strong><br /> Clients who have signed off and paid for the new Pulic Policy &amp; Ethics program will receive the discounted price of $75 per person.<br /> <br /> To RSVP click <a href=";body=Name%3A%20%0D%0ACompany%3A%20%0D%0ATitle%3A%20%0D%0AEmail%3A%20%0D%0ABB%26K%20Office%3A%20%0D%0A*%20Please%20list%20additional%20attendees%20if%20applicable.%0D%0A"><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span><span style="color: #0000ff">.</span></a><br /> <br /> <strong>Contact Person:<br /> </strong>Jessy Asfahan, Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP<br /> <a href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"></span></a>&nbsp;or (951) 826-8212</p>Seminars & Training29 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Attorney General Offers Guidance on Scope of Government Code Section 1090<p>California Attorney General Kamala Harris recently issued two opinions illuminating the scope of Government Code section 1090, the powerful and far-reaching provision of law that prohibits a government official from being &ldquo;financially interested&rdquo; in any contract made by him or her in an official capacity, or by any public body on which he or she sits.</p> <p>In the first, (Op. 13-702) Harris was asked two questions: (1) whether a community college trustee who is married to a tenured professor could participate in the collective bargaining process between the district and the bargaining unit that represents his wife and, (2) whether the trustee, a retired district employee (president) receiving health benefits from the district equal to those of current employees, could participate in the process of renegotiating health benefits provided to current employees.</p> <p>In regard to bargaining with the wife&rsquo;s unit, Harris opined that the board member could participate, but only because Government Code section 1091.5(a)(6) defines as a &ldquo;non-interest&rdquo; a spouse of an officer in his spouse&rsquo;s employment if the spouse&rsquo;s employment has existed for at least a year prior to the official&rsquo;s election or appointment to the agency board. Those were the facts in this circumstance. However, Harris held that the official could not participate in re-negotiating the health care benefits of current employees that would affect his health care benefits, as that created a direct and forbidden financial interest in that contract. Harris pointed out that the &ldquo;government salary&rdquo; exceptions in the Government Code do not apply. Harris did conclude that the community college board, with the conflicted member recused, could renegotiate the health benefits under the &ldquo;rule of necessity,&rdquo; which allows a public agency to perform essential business despite a member&rsquo;s conflict.</p> <p>In her second opinion (Op. 13-303), Harris was asked whether a city council could purchase products from a vendor in which a council member has a 50 percent ownership interest. Harris concluded that the council could not, as the council member who owned half the business has an obvious &ldquo;financial interest&rdquo; in any contract between the city and the business. Also, the &ldquo;rule of necessity&rdquo; does not apply because there are other vendors which the city could deal with. Next, she found that none of the statutory &ldquo;remote&rdquo; or &ldquo;non-interests&rdquo; applied in this circumstance. Finally, and perhaps most critically, Harris noted that, even if city staff routinely made retail purchase decisions without direction or consultation with the council, the staff&rsquo;s decisions are delegated by the council and not independent from it. Further, recusal of the conflicted council member is no cure, as the conflicted member is conclusively presumed to be involved in the making of the contract, even if done by staff.</p> <p>For more information on the California Attorney General&rsquo;s opinions and how they may affect your agency, please contact&nbsp;the attorney author of this legal alert listed at right in the firm&rsquo;s <a href=";LPA=1139&amp;format=xml"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Public Policy &amp; Ethics Compliance</span></u></a> practice group or your <a target="_blank" href=""><u><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></u></a>.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts28 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 of School Grounds for Campaign and Election Activities<p>With the election just days away, school superintendents, board members, administrators and principals are often confronted with requests to permit electioneering activity on campus, or even the uninvited appearances of candidates or citizens campaigning for a candidate or proposition on the ballot.</p> <p>Public schools are first and foremost educational institutions, but they are also public places and &ldquo;civic centers,&rdquo; and often serve as polling locations. So, what are the laws that guide access for electioneering activity?</p> <p>Education Code section 7054 provides that no school district funds, services, supplies or equipment shall be used for the purpose of urging the support or defeat of any ballot measure or candidate, including a candidate for the school&rsquo;s governing board. This statute does not address the use of, or access to, school property that would not involve the expenditure of district funds for, for example, facilities costs, security, clean-up, etc. Further, the legislative findings made when the statute was adopted reveals that it was intended to prohibit using &ldquo;public funds in election campaigns.&rdquo; Mere temporary or incidental use of school property or access to it for electioneering activities would not seem to be within the scope&nbsp;of the statute.</p> <p>However, Education Code section 7055 empowers the governing board of a school district to establish rules and regulations for &ldquo;political activities on the premises&rdquo; of the school district. In an opinion issued in 2001, the Attorney General has construed this statute as permitting &ldquo;regulation of political activities occurring on school premises.&rdquo; Thus, a district board is empowered to prohibit or restrict use of school grounds for political activity or to permit it within guidelines as to time, place and manner. And, while no court has construed this law with respect to regulation of political activities on school premises, it seems self-evident that any regulation would have to be &ldquo;content neutral&rdquo; in the sense of equally permitting or prohibiting activity regardless of position or viewpoint of the political advocacy. (In <i>Reeves v. Rocklin School Dist.</i>, handed down in 2003, the Appellate Court held that schools are nonpublic forums that may be off limits to political activity or regulated as to access, but holding any regulation must be content neutral.)</p> <p>Education Code section 32211 allows a school administrator to eject any person from school grounds who is disrupting the operation of the school, and this includes those purporting to exercise First Amendment, the media or political groups. In addition, case law has held that school access is limited, and anyone who fails to register and identify themselves while visiting campuses during school hours could be charged with a misdemeanor.</p> <p>Finally, Elections Code section 12283 authorizes use of a school facility as a polling place, which triggers restrictions on activities in and around polling places. These include restricting solicitation of potential voters and posting of signs within 100 feet of a polling place</p> <p>For more information on campaign and election activities on school grounds or other election law questions, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at right in the firm&rsquo;s <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=1139&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Public Policy and Ethics Compliance</span></a>, <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=488&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Education Law</span></a> or <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=448&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Elections Law</span></a> practice groups or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts27 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 rail isn't full steam ahead just yet<p>The state Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal challenging the validity of the bond authorization approved by the California High-Speed Rail Authority to help fund a $68 million high-speed rail project. The decision validates the authorization to issue bonds by the High-Speed Rail Authority, the state agency responsible for administration and oversight of the project, and allows the project to move beyond the preliminary planning stages.</p> <p>But additional challenges still exist regarding the funding sources for the project, which will provide passenger rail service from Northern California to Southern California in less than three hours. This includes the 3rd District Court of Appeal declining to rule on whether the bond proceeds are being spent by the agency in accordance with Proposition 1A and other pending legal challenges.</p> <p>Efforts to fund the project have been underway for more than a decade. In 2002, Senate Bill 1856 authorized the issuance of a $9.95 billion bond measure to finance a high-speed rail system in California. Not until 2008, though, did Prop. 1A, titled the &quot;Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century&quot; get on the ballot, where it was approved by nearly 53 percent of voters. Prop. 1A allocates $9.95 billion to the agency, of which $9 billion must be used to construct the rail line from San Francisco to Los Angeles, with the remaining funds to be spent on improving local railroad systems that will connect to the high-speed rail system.</p> <p><i>To read the full article in the Daily Journal, which ran Oct. 27, 2014, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a> (subscription required).</i></p>BB&K In The News27 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 and Civil Rights: An Overview of School Districts' Federal Obligation to Respond to Harassment<p>BB&amp;K attorney Michelle Jorden is speaking on a panel titled, &ldquo;Bullying and Civil Rights: An Overview of School Districts' Federal Obligation to Respond to Harassment&rdquo; at the Anti-Bullying Institute&rsquo;s conference in Riverside, Calif. Attendees of the session will develop a greater understanding of when bullying triggers obligations under Federal anti-discrimination laws; what conduct constitutes harassment (including the type of conduct and protected classes); examples of harassment; the obligation of school districts to respond to allegations of harassment in a prompt, thorough, and effective manner; examples of appropriate and inappropriate responses; and what to do if the harassment continues.</p> <p>When<br /> Thursday, Oct. 23, 2014<br /> 1:45 p.m.</p> <p>Where<br /> Riverside Convention Center<br /> <br /> For more information or to register, visit the Anti-Bullying Institute&rsquo;s conference page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here.</span></a></p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements23 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 the Gap: Private Equity Financing and Public Private Partnerships (P3s)<p>BB&amp;K Partner Seth Merewitz will present &ldquo;Bridging the Gap: Private Equity Financing and Public Private Partnerships (P3s)&rdquo; at the CASA 2014 Fall Seminar: Funding Opportunities in the Wastewater Sector. Seth will discuss when private equity financing and P3s make sense and the potential benefits of utilizing these financing approaches.</p> <p><b>When</b><br /> Thursday, Oct. 23, 2014<br /> 1:30 &ndash; 2:30 p.m.</p> <p><b>Location</b><br /> Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District<br /> 19960 Goethe Rd.<br /> Sacramento, CA 95827</p> <p>For more information or to register, visit the California Association of Sanitation Agencies events page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements23 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 218 and 26 Keeping You Awake at Night? Setting Utility Rates Without Counting Sheep<p>BB&amp;K Partner <b>Kelly Salt</b> will be presenting &ldquo;Propositions 218 and 26 Keeping You Awake at Night? Setting Utility Rates Without Counting Sheep&rdquo; at the American Water Works Association California-Nevada Section&rsquo;s Annual Fall Conference. The theme for this year&rsquo;s three-day conference is &ldquo;Finding Water in the Arid West.&rdquo;</p> <p><b>When:<br /> </b>Wed., Oct. 22<br /> 1:30 p.m.<br /> <b><br /> <br /> Location</b><br /> Grand Sierra Resort<br /> 2500 E. Second St.<br /> Reno, NV 89595<br /> <br /> For more information or to register, visit the <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">AWWA California-Nevada Annual Fall Conference website by clicking here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements22 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 & Environmental Associate - Sacramento<p>We have an immediate opening for an associate with 2-3 years of experience in municipal law (both transactional/advisory and litigation) and water law (water rights, supply and quality). Background in agriculture a plus.&nbsp; <br /> <br /> Qualified applicants are invited to apply online ONLY by clicking the link below. Applicants must attach a resume, transcript and cover letter to be considered for employment. This self-apply feature is compatible with Internet Explorer 6, 7, 8 &amp; 9, Mozilla Firefox for Windows, or Safari for Macintosh.<br /> <br /> <a target="_blank" href=";%3db8=8_CG"></a></p> <p>Please address your cover letter to:<br /> <br /> <strong>Jill N. Willis<br /> </strong><em>Chief Talent Officer<br /> </em>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP<br /> 300 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor<br /> Los Angeles, CA 90071<br /> <em><br /> <strong><em><strong>No phone calls or emails please</strong></em><br /> <br /> <b><i>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP is an Equal Opportunity Employer.</i></b></strong></em></p>Job Openings at BB&K22 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Attorney General Clarifies Oversight Board Member Compensation Rules<p>Local entities making appointments to oversight boards are prohibited from compensating the appointee, or reimbursing expenses incurred as a result of the service on the oversight board, the California Attorney General confirmed in an opinion issued last week. However, if the appointee is an employee of the appointing authority, the employee is not prohibited from receiving his or her normal compensation or expense reimbursement associated with his or her duties as an employee. The opinion clarifies the application of Health and Safety Code section 34179, subdivision (c), which regulates the compensation for oversight boards assembled to oversee the dissolution of California&rsquo;s redevelopment agencies.</p> <p>Since 1945 until their elimination in 2011, redevelopment agencies were charged with identifying and turning around underperforming areas throughout the state. However, when they were dissolved by statute, redevelopment agencies were replaced by a successor agency whose activities are overseen by a seven-member oversight board.</p> <p>Health and Safety Code section 34179(c) provides that oversight board members are to serve without compensation or reimbursement for expenses. A question arose as to whether the appointing authority could provide compensation and reimbursement of expenses to the oversight board member &mdash; despite that the successor agency and the oversight board cannot compensate the appointee. The Attorney General opined that &ldquo;the apparent severity of the no-compensation provision is tempered in several respects.&rdquo; The opinion clarifies that the law prohibits the oversight board member from receiving compensation for the service on the oversight board, but does not bar an appointed oversight board member from receiving his or her usual compensation from the appointing agency itself. This is true even if the compensation covers the time the employee spends on the board.&nbsp;</p> <p>Generally, the Attorney General concluded that, because the law allows the oversight boards to delegate much of its work to the successor agency and the successor agency staff, the prohibition on compensation was not overly burdensome.</p> <p>Local oversight boards will be dissolved effective July 1, 2016, and dissolution activities will be overseen by a regional oversight board thereafter.</p> <p>For more information on the Attorney General&rsquo;s Opinion and how it may affect your agency, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at right in the firm&rsquo;s <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=489&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Municipal Law</span></a> practice group or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i>Legal Alerts21 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Game Changer for Downtown Plaza: The Opportunities and Challenges in Developing a Mixed-Use, Retail and Entertainment Sports Complex<p>BB&amp;K Partner Stephen Stwora-Hail is moderating a panel being presented by the International Council of Shopping Centers that will discuss JMA Ventures, LLC, joint venturing with the Sacramento Kings ownership to develop the 900,000 sq. ft. (including Macy&rsquo;s) of mixed use, retail, residential and office space surrounding the new Kings Arena. Hear from panelists who are responsible for designing, developing, marketing and leasing this unique space. They will share what they envision for Downtown Plaza, the challenges they face, the opportunities they hope to create for their tenants and customers and how all of this may revitalize the surrounding area. Following the program, there will be a reception where you will be able to network with the panelists and industry peers.?</p> <p><b>When</b><br /> Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2014<br /> 5:30 &ndash; 6:30 p.m.</p> <p><b>Location</b><br /> DoubleTree Hotel by Hilton Sacramento<br /> 2001 Point West Way<br /> Sacramento, CA</p> <p>For more information or to register, visit the ICSC events page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements21 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Grappling With Challenges of How to Tax, Regulate Short-Term Rentals<p>By Joyce E. Cutler</p> <p>Cities from San Francisco to New York and Portland, Ore., to Palm Beach, Fla., are trying to figure out how and how much to regulate home sharing and to bring what could be considered part of the underground economy out in the taxable open.</p> <p>Whether renting rooms or whole houses for the weekend BottleRock concert in Napa Valley, Calif., or the sprawling South by Southwest event in Austin, Texas, tenants and homeowners are offering space for sale to strangers who book lodging on hosting platforms such as Airbnb Inc., Inc., FlipKey Inc. and Rentals by Owner. And cities are figuring out how to impose transient occupancy taxes (TOT).</p> <p>...</p> <p>Cities and counties &ldquo;are very independent creatures&rdquo; that will come up with &ldquo;a whole bunch of different solutions to this issue&rdquo; as the questions and answers evolve, William &ldquo;Jim&rdquo; Priest, of counsel in the Municipal Law practice group of Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP in the firm's Ontario, Calif., office, said Oct. 17.</p> <p>&ldquo;I think over time what will happen is this will get figured out. It may take legislation, it may take litigation, it may take both,&rdquo; Priest told Bloomberg BNA.</p>BB&K In The News20 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Business of Water and Environmental Lessons from Nuclear Disasters<p>BB&amp;K Partner Eric Garner is co-chair of &ldquo;The business of water: key issues in investing in and financing of water and wastewater projects&rdquo; at the International Bar Association&rsquo;s annual conference in Tokyo, Japan. With water supply and treatment becoming pressing concerns worldwide, and with many types of infrastructure urgently needed to provide potable water and to treat water, this panel will discuss methods that private companies are undertaking on their own efforts to protect water supplies essentials to their business models. The panel will also discuss a variety of ways that companies and governments are working together to get projects financed and constructed.</p> <p>In addition, BB&amp;K Partner Michelle Ouellette, who is senior vice chair of the Environment, Health and Safety Law Committee, is co-moderating &ldquo;Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima: lessons learned and being learned.&rdquo; This session will explore the legal lessons that we have learned as a result of the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents. In particular, it will address how the legal community has responded to these incidents from a liability, regulatory and contractual perspective. It will also address what additional legal/regulatory steps should be considered in respect to existing and future nuclear generating stations, to address any claims or consequences arising from nuclear incidents and to reduce or prevent future nuclear incidents from occurring.</p> Michelle is also the session co-chair of &ldquo;The international environmental law consequences of natural resource and energy extraction.&rdquo; As nations are increasingly looking to other countries and continents as a source of addressing rapidly growing demands for natural resource and energy commodities, triggering environmental law issues in both the domestic and foreign countries, as well as international obligations. Meanwhile, some nations are restricting trade of their own natural resources and energy commodities (including rate earth minerals). These developments are raising questions related to the environmental liability of organizations under domestic, foreign and international environmental laws. This session will discuss considerations relevant to both multinational companies and foreign governments in pursuing trade and resource and energy development in other nations, as well as environmental and trade law implications of restrictions imposed by nations on the export of resources. The session will be orientated toward any lawyers who work on issues pertaining to trade of energy commodities and natural resources and will not assume expertise in international environmental law.Conferences & Speaking Engagements20 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Goes on Offense to Identify and Fine Gift Reporting Failures<p>The Fair Political Practices Commission has initiated a proactive approach to auditing and investigating gift reporting failures by government officials, focused on local government entities (most prevalently school districts). This project has resulted in scores of officials being fined and publicly reported to date.</p> <p>The FPPC&rsquo;s most recent &ldquo;pro-active gift non-reporting project,&rdquo; following on the heels of a similar project last year, has been in process for more than eight months. On the FPPC&rsquo;s most recent agenda, the Enforcement Division proposes $18,000 in fines to be levied against 70 officials from cities, school and water districts, and housing authorities, many of whom received gifts, such as meals from businesses seeking to do business with the officials&rsquo; agencies.</p> <p>Rather than waiting for a violation to be brought to its attention, the FPPC conducts &ldquo;proactive investigations.&rdquo; This involves the Enforcement Division contacting entities known to host events that public officials are likely to attend, and receive gifts or meals at, that would be reportable on their Statement of Economic Interests. (SEIs serve a dual purpose of making a filer aware of personal economic interests, including gifts, which might relate to and cause a conflict-of-interest with respect to a government decision, and disclosing interests to the public to promote transparency in government.)</p> <p>For example, recent reports detail an audit that focused on a single &ldquo;vendor,&rdquo; which identified 312 public officials who accepted gifts from the firm over the previous four years. If the value of the meal and/or gifts provided meets or exceeds the reportable amount ($50 from same source in a reporting period), the Enforcement Division then cross-checks the public official&rsquo;s SEI Form 700 filing for the reporting period to determine if that reportable gift was, in fact, reported.</p> <p>As reported in the <i>San Diego Union-Tribune </i>on Oct. 7, of the 282 officials required to report these gifts, only 22 did. Two-hundred and sixty public officials will face warnings and will be publicly identified and fined. The FPPC can impose a fine (up to a maximum of $5,000, although normally, first time offenders are fined in the area of $200 per violation) and will publish the name of the public official in its public filings. A &ldquo;knowing&rdquo; failure to report can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor offense carrying a $10,000 fine.</p> <p>The FPPC Enforcement Division&rsquo;s pro-active program is designed to promote compliance, spelling out current violations, identifying violators, and imposing both warnings and penalties. These failures to report and the ensuing enforcement actions give lie to the notion of &ldquo;a free lunch.&rdquo; Some officials protest that the reporting requirements are confusing and difficult to conform to. Such complaints seldom sway the FPPC or buy much in terms of mitigation in treatment by the Commission. The best defense against the FPPC&rsquo;s offense is knowledge of gift reporting requirements and gift acceptance limits, and attention to on-going proper reporting of economic interests.</p> <p>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP&rsquo;s Public Policy and Ethics Group keeps apprised of any developments in FPPC policy and advises clients in public policy and ethics compliance. The Group offers AB 1234 training in-house and on-site regarding Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) filings, Conflicts of Interest, the Political Reform Act and more.</p> <p>For more details and inquiries about the FPPC&rsquo;s reporting requirements, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at the right in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=452&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Public Policy and Ethics Compliance</span></a> group, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts20 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Takes Significant Strides Toward Design-Build<p>The adoption of Senate Bill 785 signifies strong movement toward authorizing design-build procurement in California at the state and local agency levels. SB 785, effective Jan. 1, repeals several design-build statutes previously adopted by the Legislature for the purpose of testing the effectiveness and viability of design-build procurement in California. The new law resolves various problems and inconsistencies with these prior statutes by providing consolidated design-build authorization under a single source of law.</p> <p>For local agencies, SB 785 authorizes a city, county, city and county, transit district, or special district operating wastewater facilities, solid waste management facilities, water recycling facilities or fire protection facilities to utilize the design-build project delivery method on public works projects exceeding $1 million. To utilize design-build, the local agency must meet certain administrative requirements, including the use of a rigorous statutory selection procedure.</p> <p>Local agencies wishing to utilize design-build under SB 785 must follow a two-step RFQ-RFP process where prospective design-build firms are first prequalified and, for those firms that are deemed qualified, then requested to submit proposals. Selection of the design-build firm may be made on the basis of low bid or best value. &nbsp;Best value requires the local agency to take into consideration various factors in addition to price in ranking proposals. At minimum, the local agency must consider technical design and construction expertise, project price and life-cycle costs over a minimum of 15 years. In the event a local agency elects to utilize best value, the agency may also hold discussions and negotiations with responsive proposers. Local agencies using best value must award the design-build contract to the firm offering the best value to the public. Once an award is made utilizing either low bid or best value, the local agency must publicly announce the award and provide a statement regarding the basis of the award.</p> <p>In addition to the lengthy selection process under SB 785, the new law also contains significant skilled workforce requirements. Local agencies should be cognizant that design-build firms not meeting the skilled workforce requirements under the new law may not be prequalified. Because of this and other potentially restrictive requirements under SB 785, it should be noted that the enactment of SB 785 does not preclude local agencies that retain separate authority to utilize design-build from exercising that authority. Local agencies that are authorized to use design-build under SB 785 and one or more other sources of authority should determine what design-build procurement process and requirements best serves the agency&rsquo;s interests.</p> <p>For more information about SB 785 and the design-build project delivery method, please contact the authors of this legal alert listed at right in the firm&rsquo;s <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=451&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Public Contracts and Construction group</span></a>, <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=524&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Transportation group</span></a> or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i>Legal Alerts20 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Telecommunications Law: Threats and Opportunities for Texas Cities<p>BB&amp;K Partner Joseph Van Eaton presented &quot;Federal Telecommunications Law: Threats and Opportunities for Texas Cities&quot; at the Texas Coalition of Cities for Utility Issues 2014 Seminar in Houston, Texas.</p> <p>A copy of his presentation can be found <a target="_blank" href="88E17A/assets/files/Documents/Federal Telecommunications Law.pdf"><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements17 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Radio Licenses: Saving Paper Doesn't Change Notice Requirements<p>Many municipal governments and special districts, especially public safety departments, hold radio licenses or antenna structure permits from the Federal Communications Commission. <a target="_blank" href=""><u><span style="color: #0000ff">The FCC is proposing to save paper and staff time by making the authorizations stored on agency databases &ldquo;official&rdquo; records.</span></u></a></p> <p>However, licensees would still be required to post paper copies where the rules call for it, or to notify tenants on communication towers that the facilities are duly registered.</p> <p>During a proposed transition period, licensees could opt out of continuing mail delivery of licenses. If the proposal to rely on electronic records is adopted, licensees wishing to continue to receive paper copies would then be asked to notify the FCC of that choice. Licensees no longer receiving paper copies could print from the official electronic record any documents they need to post.</p> <p>A selection of FCC regulations requiring notice or posting appears below. Licensees should be familiar with state or local paper record requirements that may differ from, or add to, the federal regulations.</p> <p>The FCC will accept public comment on its paper-saving proposals until Nov. 10. If you have questions about how this proposed policy change will affect your municipality or agency, or if you need assistance with commenting, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at right in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=489&amp;format=xml"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">Municipal Law</span></u></a> practice group or your <a target="_blank" href=""><u><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></u></a>.</p> <p><span style="color: #0000ff"><b><a target="_blank" href=";node=pt47.5.90&amp;rgn=div5#sp47.5.90.n"><span style="color: #0000ff">Title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 90, Subpart N</span></a></b></span></p> <p><b>&sect;90.437 Posting station licenses.</b></p> <p>(a) The current original authorization for each station shall be retained as a permanent part of the station records but need not be posted.</p> <p>(b) Entities authorized under this part must make available either a clearly legible photocopy of the authorization for each base or fixed station at a fixed location at every control point of the station or an address or location where the current authorization may be found.</p> <p>(c) An applicant operating under temporary authority in accordance with &sect;90.159 must post an executed copy of FCC Form 601 at every control point of the system or an address or location where the current executed copy may be found.</p> <p><b>&sect;90.439 &nbsp;Inspection of stations.</b></p> <p>All stations and records of stations in these services shall be made available for inspection at any reasonable time and any time while the station is in operation upon reasonable request of an authorized representative of the Commission.</p> <p><b>&sect;90.441 &nbsp;Inspection and maintenance of antenna structure marking and associated control equipment.</b></p> <p>The owner of each antenna structure required to be painted and/or illuminated under the provisions of Section 303(q) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, shall operate and maintain the antenna structure painting and lighting in accordance with part 17 of this chapter. In the event of default by the owner, each licensee or permittee shall be individually responsible for conforming to the requirements pertaining to antenna structure painting and lighting.</p> <p><b>&sect;17.4 &nbsp;Antenna structure registration.</b></p> <p>(f) The Commission shall issue, to the registrant, FCC Form 854R, Antenna Structure Registration, which assigns a unique Antenna Structure Registration Number. The structure owner shall immediately provide a copy of Form 854R to each tenant licensee and permittee.</p> <p><b>&sect;90.447 &nbsp;Retention of station records.</b></p> <p>Records required by this part shall be retained by the licensee for at least one year.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts16 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Issues in Discipline and Layoffs and DFEH Complaints<p>Best Best &amp; Krieger Partner <b>Arlene Prater</b> will be speaking on &ldquo;Advanced Issues in Discipline and Layoffs: How to Separate the &lsquo;Protected&rsquo; Employee&rdquo; at the Public Employer Labor Relations Association of California&rsquo;s 5th Annual Conference. Arlene will discuss how to successfully discipline or layoff an employee who has engaged in a protected activity, such as requesting a disability accommodation, taking a medical leave, filing a complaint of harassment or speaking out against the employer.</p> <p>In addition, BB&amp;K partners <strong>Alison Alpert </strong>and <strong>Joseph Sanchez </strong>will present &ldquo;We Just Received A DFEH Complaint . . . Now What?&rdquo; They will answer questions such as: How long do I have to respond? Should I hire an outside expert? How valid is the claim? What do I need to do to effectively present my agency&rsquo;s side without coming across as defensive? In this session you will learn how to properly handle and respond to a DFEH claim to help ensure your agency prevails with its response.</p> <p><strong>When</strong><br /> Arlene Prater<br /> Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2014<br /> 2:45 &ndash; 4 p.m.</p> <p>Alison Alpert and Joseph Sanchez<br /> Thursday, Oct. 16, 2014<br /> 9:30 &ndash; 10:45 a.m. <br /> <br /> <strong>Location<br /> </strong>The Queen Mary<br /> 1126 Queens Highway<br /> Long Beach</p> <p>For more information or to register, visit the <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">PELRAC events page</span></a>.<br /> &nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements15 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Campaign or Not to Campaign: A Refresher<p><b><i>By Scott C. Smith and Matthew Richardson, Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP</i></b></p> <p>As November elections and some major ballot measures loom, and as 2016 general election candidates start copping to &ldquo;thinking about a run,&rdquo; now seems a good time to revisit the impartiality required of public agencies and their employees when it comes to election ballot matters.</p> <p>Running afoul of these important laws regarding the use of public funds and advocacy can land a public agency and/or its employees in hot water, but compliance really just requires some common sense and presence of mind.</p> <p><b>Use of Public Funds</b></p> <p>California law allows public agencies to expend public money and resources to educate voters on matters included on an upcoming ballot. State law does not permit using public money or resources to advocate on behalf of, or attempt to influence voters on election matters. In short, a public agency may not encourage &ldquo;yes&rdquo; or &ldquo;no&rdquo; votes, but may expend public funds on informational activities that provide a fair representation of the facts surrounding a ballot measure. In short, education is permitted; advocacy is not.</p> <p>The prohibition on the use of public funds for traditional campaigning purposes is founded on the principle that proponents and opponents of a local proposition have an equal right and interest in the use of local public monies and resources. Selective and imbalanced use of public funds in election campaigns improperly distorts the democratic process.</p> <p>Although no particular rule governs every case, the following factors help distinguish between improper campaigning activities and proper, informational activities:</p> <ul type="disc"> <li>Balanced Presentation. Legitimate informational activities are those that present information relevant to both sides of an issue, including potentially positive and negative impacts. One way to ensure a balanced presentation is to provide measure opponents (who, by definition, might not have had a hand in crafting the ballot measure)actual access to publications so they may provide their contrary point of view.</li> </ul> <ul type="disc"> <li>Campaign Materials. Public monies should not fund items such as bumper stickers, posters, advertising floats or television or radio spot surging a particular vote on a measure.</li> </ul> <ul type="disc"> <li>Public Meetings. The agency&rsquo;s view on a measure may be expressed at a noticed public meeting because individuals in opposition to the agency&rsquo;s view are afforded an opportunity to speak out. In this situation, the agency is not limited to providing a fair presentation of the facts, and members of the governing board may advocate for or against a measure.</li> </ul> <ul type="disc"> <li>Use of Public Resources. Using public resources to influence voters on a measure is not permitted. Public resources include any property owned by the agency, including buildings, facilities, funds, equipment, telephones, supplies, computers and vehicles. Public resources also include the use of agency staff. Therefore, correspondence favoring or opposing a measure should not be authored by agency employees during working hours.</li> </ul> <p><b>Preparing or Developing a Ballot Measure (Before Inclusion on the Ballot)</b></p> <p>One of the primary functions of elected and appointed officials is to devise legislative proposals to implement the current administration&rsquo;s policies. Consequently, courts have held that a public agency may prepare, develop and draft proposed legislation, including a ballot measure, to be submitted to the voters. A public body&rsquo;s ability to prepare and present a ballot measure probably includes some ability to publish and disseminate it, but these activities should not exceed what is statutorily prescribed under the Elections Code and what the agency normally does in connection with public notification of other minute motions, resolutions and ordinances ordinarily adopted by the agency.</p> <p><b>Campaigning by Officials </b></p> <p>As discussed above, the use of public funds in connection with a ballot measure is restricted to informational activities. However, when the use of public funds or resources is not involved, this restriction does not apply. Therefore, agency officials may attend rallies and neighborhood meetings, or go door-to-door, as long as they do not represent that they are doing so in connection with official business and are not using public funds or time in connection with such activities. Where agency time or funds are involved, the effort must be strictly limited to providing objective information to the public. It is also important to note that public employees are specifically prohibited from participating in any sort of political activity while in uniform.</p> <p>Officials who wish to participate in activities concerning ballot measures may do so in their individual, as opposed to official, capacity.</p> <p>They may also expend their own personal funds on a measure and identify themselves as being affiliated with the agency in any presentation or publication advocating for or against the passage of the measure. However, it should be clear that such presentation or publication is paid for with the official&rsquo;s personal funds, or some other funding source, and not with public funds.</p> <p><i>* This article first appeared in <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"></span></a> on Oct. 14, 2014. Republished with permission.</i></p>BB&K In The News14 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 can offset cracked sidewalk liability<p>Despite procedural safeguards designed. by the state Legislature to prevent municipalities from becoming the insurer of public ways against all defects, California cities continue to become engaged in litigation arising out of &quot;trip and fall&quot; accidents along its miles and miles of public sidewalks. While excessive litigation against private citizens and corporations is problematic, excessive litigation against California's public entities has devastating potential. The immunities afforded to such entities by the Government Claims Act, codified at Government Code Section 810 et seq., occasionally prove inadequate in protecting against the expenditure of tax payer dollars when defending dangerous condition of public property litigation.</p> <p>Generally, municipalities are not liable for dangerous conditions of public property where a condition does not pose a substantial (as opposed to trivial) risk of injury to foreseeable users when used with due care. Government Code Sections 830 and 830.2. Yet, in the case of height differentials, cracks, spalling and other defects commonly afflicting city sidewalks, to what extent do private property owners owe a duty to pedestrians and bicyclists for the condition of public sidewalks immediately adjacent to or abutting their property? Streets and Highways Code Section 561o, which imposes a duty of maintenance and repair upon private property owners, often goes unused and even unknown by many public agencies.</p> <p>In relevant part, Section 5610 provides that, &quot;owners of lots or portions of lots fronting on any portion of a public street ... shall maintain any sidewalk in such condition that the sidewalk will not endanger persons or property.' While it is notable that Section 561.0 does not impose any liability for personal injuries to third parties for a condition of a public sidewalk upon a private property owner, it does impose a duty upon a private property owner to share in the cost of maintaining the adjacent sidewalk In other words, Section 5610 can be utilized by municipalities to help offset the cost of repair to and maintenance of old, damaged, worn out or defective sidewalks, thereby reducing overall costs to the municipalities.</p> <i>To read the full article in the Daily Journal, which ran Oct. 14, 2014, <a target="_blank" href=";pubdate=10/14/2014&amp;shNewsType=NEWS&amp;NewsId=-1&amp;sdivId=&amp;screenHt=670#section=tab3.cfm%3Fseloption%3Dnews%26pubdate%3D10/14/2014%26shNewsType%3DPerspective%26NewsId%3D937654%26sdivId%3Dtab3"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></u></a> (subscription required).</i>BB&K In The News14 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Water Board Releases Draft Safe Drinking Water Plan<p>The State Water Resources Control Board released a draft Safe Drinking Water Plan for California. The draft plan assesses the quality of the state's drinking water, identifies specific water quality problems, analyzes known and potential health risks that may be associated with drinking water contamination, and provides specific recommendations to improve drinking water quality.</p> <p>With the transition of the Drinking Water Program from the California Department of Public Health on July 1 the State Water Board now has the primary authority to enforce federal and state safe drinking water acts, and is responsible for the regulatory oversight of about 8,000 public water systems throughout the state. One of the goals in transferring the program was to promote safe drinking water through more integrated water quality management, from source to tap.</p> <p>The draft plan contains 32 practical recommendations in nine areas that would expand the State Water Board&rsquo;s efforts to bring a greater number of systems into compliance. Recommendations include consolidating small water systems with larger systems wherever feasible, increasing funding to small and disadvantaged communities, and increased emergency preparedness.</p> <p>The State Water Board is accepting comments on the draft plan until Dec. 15. If your agency is concerned about the contents of the draft plan or would like assistance submitting comments, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at right in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=492&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Environmental and Natural Resources</span></a> or&nbsp;<a target="_top" href=";LPA=489&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Municipal</span></a>&nbsp; practice groups, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts13 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 a Career in Law Enforcement<p>Paul Cappitelli, a law enforcement specialist at Best Best &amp; Krieger, LLP, reflects on 37 years of working in and around law enforcement in an article he penned for There are challenges to surviving a law enforcement career, he writes, including injuries, mistakes and unethical conduct.</p> <p><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Read the article, and his tips for increasing the longevity of a law enforcement career, by clicking here.</span></a></p>BB&K In The News10 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Partner Michelle Ouellette Among Diversity Journal's 2015 Women Worth Watching<p><b>RIVERSIDE, Calif.</b> _ Michelle Ouellette, a Best Best &amp; Krieger partner in the firm&rsquo;s Riverside office, is one of 160 women named to the <i>Diversity Journal&rsquo;s</i> 2015 Women Worth Watching&reg; list. Ouellette, who practices in the Environmental Law &amp; Natural Resources group, was nominated for her positive influence on diversity both inside and outside the workplace.</p> <p>In the September/October 2014 edition of <i>Diversity Journal</i>, Ouellette gives a first-person account of lessons learned during her career &mdash; including how building relationships, staying competitive and working hard can lead to success. (<a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Click here to see the article</span></a>.)</p> <p>&ldquo;Michelle represents what can be accomplished by women, or anyone, who work hard and are passionate about what they do,&rdquo; said BB&amp;K Partner Danielle Sakai, who oversees recruiting. &ldquo;She sets a fantastic example for the less experienced female attorneys in the firm, whom she supports and mentors.&rdquo;</p> <p>This is the <i>Diversity Journal&rsquo;s</i> 13th year publishing this list, which includes women from a variety of industries and locations nationwide. &ldquo;When we launched our inaugural Women Worth Watching issue, we knew we were doing something unique,&rdquo; said Kathie Sandlin, the magazine&rsquo;s editor in chief. &ldquo;We may not have been the first to celebrate the accomplishments of women in business, but we knew by telling their stories, we could help propel the wave of high achievers that would certainly follow.&rdquo;</p> <p>BB&amp;K has a strong commitment to diversity. In May 2014, <i>The American Lawyer</i> ranked BB&amp;K No. 12 in attorney racial diversity out of more than 200 of the largest and highest-grossing law firms nationwide on their annual &quot;<a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Diversity Scorecard</span></a>.&quot; In addition, BB&amp;K was recognized in June 2014 by <i>Law360</i> for being one of the top 25 U.S. law firms - out of 400 surveyed - that have the highest percentage of female partners. BB&amp;K ranked No. 13 on <i>Law360</i>&rsquo;s first ever &quot;<span style="color: #0000ff"><u><a target="_blank" href=";an=31314&amp;format=xml">Ceiling Smashers</a></u></span>&quot; list, with women accounting for nearly a third of the firm&rsquo;s partners.</p> <p align="center">###</p> <b><i>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP</i></b><i> is a national law firm that focuses on environmental, business, education, municipal and telecommunications law for public agency and private clients. With 200 attorneys, the law firm has nine offices nationwide, including Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego and Washington D.C. For more information, visit </i><span style="color: #0000ff"><i><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"></span></a></i></span><i><span> or follow @BBKlaw on <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Twitter</span></a>.</span></i>Press Releases09 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Great Energy Debate<p>Join BB&amp;K Partners Robert Hargreaves and Sophie Akins at the Southern California Energy Summit&rsquo;s &ldquo;The Great Energy Debate,&rdquo; Oct. 9 &ndash; 10, in Palm Springs, Calif. They will be joined by regional leaders from the counties of Riverside, San Bernardino, Imperial, Inyo, Mono, Kern and Los Angeles to discuss the opportunities, challenges and solutions facing the various energy industries of Southern California. Learn from private and public sector leaders about how new programs, policy and trends that will affect your business and community. Explore interactive exhibits and discover new energy efficient and sustainable technologies.</p> <p>Be sure to stop by BB&amp;K&rsquo;s booth on Friday, Oct. 10.</p> <p>BB&amp;K Speakers</p> <p>&ldquo;Renewable Energy Opportunities at the Salton Sea&rdquo;<br /> What current efforts are underway to facilitate renewable energy opportunities and restoration? What renewable energy opportunities are on horizon?<br /> Moderator: Robert Hargreaves, Partner, Best Best &amp; Krieger</p> <p>&ldquo;Advancing Local Rooftop Solar &amp; Energy Storage&rdquo; <br /> How can the region support the advancement of local rooftop solar and energy storage?&nbsp; How do we engage property owners to participate?&nbsp;How do we make it happen with utilities (municipal vs. investor) considering interconnection costs, upgrades, etc.? These and other questions will be addressed.<br /> Moderator: &nbsp;Sophie Akins, Partner, Best Best &amp; Krieger</p> <p>When<br /> Oct. 9-10, 2014</p> <p>Where:<br /> Palm Springs Convention Center<br /> 277 N. Avenida Caballeros<br /> Palm Springs, CA 92262</p> <p>For more information or to register, visit the Southern California Energy Summit page by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements09 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Action Planning by Local Government<p>BB&amp;K attorneys <b>Fernando Avila</b> and <b>Charity Schiller</b> will present &ldquo;Urban Density, Transit, Water/Energy Conservation and Distributed Energy: Climate Action Planning by Local Government&rdquo; at CLE International&rsquo;s &ldquo;California Greenhouse Gas Regulations&rdquo; two-day program.</p> <p><b>When:</b><br /> Oct. 6, 2014<br /> 3:30 p.m.</p> <p><b>Location:</b><br /> Hotel Nikko, San Francisco<br /> For more information or to register, visit CLE International by <a target="_blank" href=";src=Featured&amp;page=California_Greenhouse_Gas_Regulations"><font color="#0000ff">clicking here</font></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements07 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 and the Law<p>Program Co-Chair and BB&amp;K Managing Partner <b>Eric Garner</b> and Partner <b>Shawn Hagerty</b> are among the presenters at this one-day seminar titled &ldquo;Hydrology and the Law: Effective Tools for Resolving Water Rights and Damages Issues&rdquo; in Santa Monica, Calif. and webcast live. California is in the midst of a historic drought. Surface water deliveries are at an all-time low and many groundwater basins are being significantly drawn down. As the State, other public agencies and private interests struggle with how to maintain supplies in the short and long term, as well as protect the environment and comply with environmental regulations, understanding how hydrology and the law interrelate has never been more important.</p> <p>This one-day seminar will explain the basics of hydrology and how it interacts with the law in California for the benefit of practitioners in both fields. In particular, leading experts in both fields will examine the relationship between hydrology and the law as it relates to water quality and pending groundwater legislation, as well as how hydrology comes into play during litigation. This seminar will help practitioners in both fields improve their overall understanding of these very interrelated fields just as water issues are front page news.</p> <p style="text-align: left"><strong><em>Half-price registration is available to BB&amp;K guests. Please call (206) 567-4490 or email </em></strong><strong><a href=""><em><font color="#0000ff"></font></em></a><em> and mention BB&amp;K to obtain this special discount.</em></strong></p> <p><b>BB&amp;K Speakers</b></p> <p>Eric Garner<br /> 8:30 a.m., &ldquo;Introduction and Overview: Surface and Groundwater Law and Relevant Legal Concepts&rdquo;<br /> 2:30 p.m., &ldquo;The Practical Application of Science to New Groundwater Regulation&rdquo;</p> <p>Shawn Hagerty<br /> 1:30 p.m., &ldquo;The Practical Application of Science to Current Water Quality Issues: Challenges of Certainty in an Uncertain World&rdquo;</p> <p><b>What You Will Learn</b></p> <ul> <li>Hydrology of surface water, groundwater and sub-surface flows</li> <li>Water supply forecasting</li> <li>Application of science to water quality issues</li> <li>New groundwater regulations</li> <li>The use of science in resolving water quality disputes and damages</li> </ul> <p><b>Who Should Attend</b></p> <ul> <li>Attorneys</li> <li>Consultants</li> <li>Real estate developers</li> <li>Agricultural water users</li> <li>Agency and Tribal representatives</li> <li>Anyone else involved in water issues in California</li> </ul> <p><b>Date:</b><br /> Oct. 7, 2014<br /> 8 a.m. &ndash; 5 p.m.</p> <p><b>Location:</b><br /> DoubleTree Guest Suites Santa Monica Hotel or Live via Webcast</p> <p><b>Continuing Education Credits</b><br /> Live credits: Law Seminars International is a State Bar of California approved MCLE provider. This program qualifies for 6.75 California MCLE credits. Upon request, we will apply for, or help you apply for, CLE credits in other states and other types of credits.</p> <p>For more information, <a target="_blank" href=""><font color="#0000ff">visit the Law Seminars International event page by clicking here</font></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements07 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Associate - Riverside, Irvine or LA<p>Our Environmental &amp; Natural Resources Group has an immediate opening for an associate with a minimum of 4 years of CEQA experience (both transactional and litigation), as well as land use experience. A planning background is ideal.&nbsp; The attorney can be based in our Riverside, Irvine or Los Angeles office; however, he/she must be willing to work out of our Riverside office regularly and as needed.<br /> <br /> Qualified applicants are invited to apply online by clicking the link below. Applicants must attach a resume, transcript and cover letter to be considered for employment. This self-apply feature is compatible with Internet Explorer 6, 7, 8 &amp; 9, Mozilla Firefox for Windows, or Safari for Macintosh.<br /> <br /> <a target="_blank" href=";%3db8=8_CG"></a></p> <p>Please address your cover letter to:<br /> <br /> <strong><span>Jill N. Willis<br /> </span></strong><span><em>Chief Talent Officer<br /> </em>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP<br /> 300 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor<br /> Los Angeles, CA 90071<br /> </span><em><span><br /> </span><strong><span><em><strong>No phone calls please</strong></em><br /> <br /> <b><i>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP is an Equal Opportunity Employer.</i></b></span></strong></em></p>Job Openings at BB&K07 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Broadening Infrastructure Financing Districts Signed by Gov. Brown<p>Four bills affecting infrastructure financing districts, a funding mechanism for infrastructure and development projects that benefit the broader community, were recently signed by Gov. Jerry Brown. IFDs, created in 1990, have garnered renewed interest after the dissolution of redevelopment in California as a way for cities to capture the resulting increase in property tax revenues generated by the affected area (tax increment financing). The legislative intent to provide an alternative means for local communitiesto finance public infrastructure and improvements, in the wake of the dissolution of redevelopment agencies, is explicitly noted in these bills:</p> <p><span style="color: #0000ff"><b><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">SB 628</span></a></b></span> by Sen. Jim Beall (D-San Jose) allows local agencies to create enhanced infrastructure financing districts &nbsp;to finance specified infrastructure projects and facilities, and reduces the statutory threshold for voter approval of an EIFD&rsquo;s issuance of tax increment bonds from two-thirds to 55 percent. An EIFD&rsquo;s lifespan is also significantly extended from 30 years to a period of no more than 45 years from the date on which the issuance of bonds is approved. An EIFD authorizes the issuance of bonds to finance capital public infrastructure projects with tax increment financing.<br /> <br /> EIFDs can be used to finance every type of public infrastructure, as well as other types of capital projects. Eligible projects include transportation, transit, water treatment, flood control and storm water quality management, industrial facilities for private use, affordable housing, childcare facilities, libraries, parks, public facilities, energy, solid waste disposal and environmental impact mitigation. EIFDs also have the power to finance the re-use of former military bases, fund transit projects, and construct and rehabilitate affordable housing units.</p> <p>EIFDs may also utilize any powers under the Polanco Redevelopment Act, which would allow the EIFD to take actions necessary to remedy or remove a release of hazardous substances within the EIFD&rsquo;s boundaries.</p> <p>Among the prerequisites for forming an EIFD, cities with former redevelopment agencies must have received a finding of completion from the Department of Finance, and resolved all outstanding litigation matters.</p> <p><span style="color: #0000ff"><b><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">SB 614</span></a></b></span> by Sen. Lois Wolk (D-Vacaville) allows a local agency, until Jan. 1, 2025, to use tax increment financing in a newly formed or reorganized IFD to fund improvements or upgrades to structures, roads, sewer or water facilities, or other infrastructure that serves a disadvantaged unincorporated community. A community qualifies as a &ldquo;disadvantaged unincorporated community&rdquo; if the annual median household income is less than 80 percent&nbsp;of the statewide annual median household income.</p> <p><a href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"><b>AB 229</b> </span></a>by Assemblymember John Perez (D-Los Angeles ) authorizes a city to form an IFD to finance projects on a former military base and dedicate any portion of its funds from the Redevelopment Agency Property Tax Trust Fund to the district. The bill also allows districts to finance projects in former RDA areas.</p> <p><span style="color: #0000ff"><b><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">AB 2292</span></a></b></span>&nbsp;by Assemblymember Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) authorizes cities to create IFDs that can issue bonds to pay for public capital facilities or projects for broadband. Before AB 2292, city-wide fiber optic networks could qualify for IFD financing in some cases, even though it was not specifically included in the definition of eligible projects for communitywide infrastructure. The bill expands the definition of public capital facilities to specifically include broadband and any communications network facilities that enable high-speed Internet access.</p> <p>If you have any questions about IFDs, tax increment financing or economic development, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at right in the firm&rsquo;s <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=489&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Municipal Law</span></a> practice group, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>. For more discussion and updates on IFDs, please visit <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"></span></a> and subscribe to <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K Legal Alerts</span></a>.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts06 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Signs Legislation Amending California's Water Service Duplication Statute<p>Assembly Bill 2443, signed Monday by Gov. Jerry Brown, amends California&rsquo;s Water Service Duplication Statute to allow for political subdivisions, such as municipalities or county water districts, to provide recycled water service to customers within the service area of privately owned water companies that do not currently provide recycled water service, upon the political subdivision&rsquo;s compliance with the Water Recycling Act.</p> <p>Under previous law, the California Water Service Duplication Statute attempted to grant privately owned water companies the right to be paid compensation for the diminution in the value of their property occurring as a result of the duplication of water service by a political subdivision, which was interpreted by some to prevent the expansion of recycled water service.&nbsp;The lone exception to this rule was a legislative amendment that exempted the use of recycled water by entities in Los Angeles County from the compensation requirement of the Statute.&nbsp;</p> <p>Specifically, AB 2443 makes inapplicable the requirement that a mutual water company is entitled to compensation when a public agency constructs facilities to provide or extend recycled water service to the territory of the mutual water company and has fully complied with the Water Recycling Act. However, this exemption would not apply in the case of a public agency providing or extending recycled water service to the territory of the mutual water company that already provides recycled water service, or has developed specific plans to provide recycled water service, by Dec. 31.</p> <p>For more information about how this amendment to the Water Service Duplication Statute will affect your agency, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at right in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=492&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Environmental Law &amp; Natural Resources</span></a> practice group, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts03 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 in Law: Hybrid corporations combine profit and good will<p>By George Reyes and Patrick Monroe</p> <p>In 2012, California created two new subtypes of stock corporations &ndash; a &ldquo;Flexible Purpose Corporation&rdquo; and a &ldquo;Benefit Corporation&rdquo; (also known as a &ldquo;B corporation&rdquo;).</p> <p>These new subtypes enable entrepreneurs to form hybrid corporations, operating with both economic and social objectives. California is one of at least six states to acknowledge entities that pursue profit as well as aim to create a positive impact on society.</p> <p>These stock corporation subtypes differ from both traditional, for-profit corporations that are organized to pursue profit and nonprofit corporations that must be used solely to promote social benefits.</p> <p>Traditionally, directors and officers who pursued activity outside of the scope of the purpose of a corporation could be held liable to shareholders. These new entities give directors and officers the flexibility to pursue both profit and social objectives without the risk of liability associated with doing so in a traditional corporation.</p> <p>Although these hybrid corporations provide greater flexibility to those who run them, they are rather new in California and have little, if any legal, precedent to support them. The precedent that does exists is from other states, which California is not required to follow.</p> <p>A lack of precedent creates uncertainty as to what directors and officers can and cannot do within the bounds of the law. This should be considered when deciding whether or not to form a Flexible Purpose Corporation or a Benefit Corporation.</p> <p>Some owners are enticed by the marketing prospects of claiming that their corporation provides a social benefit, and therefore are interested in converting their traditional for-profit corporations into a Flexible Purpose Corporation or Benefit Corporation. However, this can actually have a devaluing effect on the corporation. In a hybrid corporation, management can redirect assets to activities that often do not result in profit, which ultimately could result in a lower share price.</p> <p>For those corporations that are primarily profit driven, a hybrid corporation probably is not a good choice since the shareholders or future investors may be resistant to trade profit for good will.</p> <p>On the other hand, organizations that are primarily driven by a passion for doing good could benefit from forming a hybrid corporation rather than a traditional for-profit or nonprofit corporation. A hybrid corporation can receive investment from like-minded people without running the risk of being sued by profit-minded shareholders.</p> <p>In addition, the hybrid corporation can take profits for its shareholders without having to worry about the restrictive tax rules that govern nonprofit corporations.</p> <p>Ultimately, the decision to use a hybrid corporation should be based on the founders&rsquo; true motives balanced with their tolerance for risk and willingness to follow the applicable rules.</p> <p><i>*This article first appeared in <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">The Press-Enterprise</span></a> on Oct. 2 , 2014. Republished with permission.</i></p>BB&K In The News02 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Lacking for On-Street Disabled Parking<p>The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in <i>Fortyune v. City of Lomita</i>, 2014 DJDAR 12344 (Sept. 25, 2014), that the Americans with Disabilities Act requires cities to provide on-street parking that is accessible to people with disabilities. Though handicapped parking is commonplace, the existing design standards only govern parking within facilities, not on-street parking.</p> <p><i>Fortyune</i> is the first case to find an obligation under the ADA, even in the absence of corresponding design standards.</p> <p>The plaintiff in <i>Fortyune</i> was a paraplegic who alleged that he experienced &quot;great difficulty, discomfort, and even fear for his safety&quot; because of a lack of accessible on-street parking. The city moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that, without specific regulations targeting on-street parking, the city could not have any obligations under the ADA. The 9th Circuit found that, despite the lack of accessibility standards, on-street parking is a normal function of a city and therefore must be made accessible. In essence, the decision in <i>Fortyune</i> interprets the ADA as requiring a general obligation to make all public services accessible, and therefore it is not limited to specific regulations.</p> <p>The U.S. Department of Justice is responsible for developing regulations to implement the ADA. As part of this duty, the DOJ adopts specific technical and scoping standards for the design and construction of public facilities. All public facilities that have been constructed or altered since 1991- when the ADA regulations first became effective - must be built and constructed in conformance with these standards.</p> <i>Click <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></a> to read the entire article published on Oct. 2, 2014 in the Daily Journal (subscription required).</i>BB&K In The News02 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Court Rules Fingerprint Impressions Are Records Of Arrest That Can Be Sealed and Destroyed<p><b>Overview: </b>The California Court of Appeal held that fingerprint impressions taken of suspects at the time of their arrest constitute &ldquo;records of arrest&rdquo; that can be sealed and destroyed if the suspect is found to be factually innocent under Penal Code section 851.8.</p> <p><b>Training Points: </b>While all law enforcement agencies are required to submit fingerprint impressions of arrestees to the Department of Justice and the Attorney General&rsquo;s Office, some agencies have their own internal policies regarding when to retain or when to destroy this evidence.</p> <p><b>Summary Analysis: </b>In <i>People v. Christiansen, </i>Christiansen appealed her conviction on charges related to violations of the conflict-of-interest laws under the Government Code. Her convictions were reversed, her sentence vacated and the charges dismissed. On remand, Christiansen moved for a dismissal of the charges and a finding of &ldquo;factual innocence&rdquo; under Penal Code section 851.8, including an order that all records of her arrest and conviction be sealed and destroyed. The court granted Christiansen&rsquo;s request for relief under Penal Code section 851.8, declaring Christiansen &ldquo;factually innocent&rdquo; of the charges and ordered her arrest record sealed and destroyed. But, rather than issuing an order to destroy her fingerprint impressions, the court ordered them retained. Christiansen appealed.</p> <p>The Appellate Court held that Christiansen&rsquo;s fingerprint impressions constituted &ldquo;records of arrest&rdquo; within the meaning of Penal Code section 851.8, and should have been sealed and destroyed since Christiansen was found to be factually innocent. &nbsp;The Court rejected the prosecution&rsquo;s argument that Christiansen&rsquo;s fingerprint impressions should be retained to track arrests and convictions. The Court found this argument nonsensical since the statute itself <i>requires</i> the destruction of records of arrests of persons found to be factually innocent, therefore obviating the need to track or retain information about these persons.</p> <p>An affected agency can expect to receive a letter from the defendant&rsquo;s counsel with the court order to seal and destroy records and fingerprint impressions.</p> <p><b>Follow-Up Contact: </b>For questions regarding this case or its implications for your agency and public safety department, please contact one of the authors of this bulletin listed at right in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=2532&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Public Safety practice</span></a>, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i>Legal Alerts02 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Summary of California Water Rights Systems and a Primer for Public Water Agency Directors<p>BB&amp;K attorneys Eric Garner and Jeff Ferre will be presenting at the Water Education Foundation&rsquo;s 2014 Water 101 Workshop. This course offers the opportunity to learn the California water basics and water district board member governance. It is open to anyone interested in learning more about the history of, and the management structure of, water in California, and about the key water issues facing the State &ndash; including the drought, groundwater management and the potential for a 2014 water bond.</p> <p>BB&amp;K Managing Partner Eric Garner will present &ldquo;Summary of California Water Rights Systems&rdquo; on Thursday, Oct. 2 at 10:30 a.m. Eric will discuss:</p> <ul> <li>Riparian Rights</li> <li>Appropriative Rights</li> <li>Groundwater Law and Cases</li> <li>Reasonable and Beneficial Use</li> <li>Public Trust Law and Cases</li> </ul> <p>BB&amp;K Partner Jeff Ferre will present &ldquo;Governance Primer for Water District Directors&rdquo; on Friday, Oct. 3 at 9 a.m. He will speak about:</p> <ul> <li>The Role and Responsibilities of a Water District Director</li> <li>Building an Effective Board</li> <li>The Brown Act &ndash; Basic Requirements</li> <li>The Fair Political Practices Act &ndash; Basic Requirements</li> <li>Conflict of Interest Code</li> <li>Requirements for Ethics Training</li> <li>Avoiding Common Legal and Political Pitfalls for Directors</li> </ul> <p><strong>Audience:<br /> </strong>The course will be especially beneficial to water resource industry staff, engineering and environmental firm personnel, legislators, legislative staff, press, advocates, stakeholders, environmentalists, public interest organizations and water district directors.</p> <p><strong>When:</strong><br /> Thursday, Oct. 2 &ndash; Friday, Oct. 3, 2014</p> <p>Where:<br /> The Cucamonga Valley Water District&rsquo;s Frontier Project in Rancho Cucamonga</p> <p>For more information or to register, please click <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"><span style="background-color: #ffffff">here</span></span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements02 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Signs Two Gun-Related Bills; Vetoes One<p>Gov. Jerry Brown recently took action on three bills of interest to law enforcement. He signed a measure allowing temporary restraining orders to block gun use, approved a bill requiring toy guns to be brightly colored and vetoed legislation that would have required Californians to register homemade guns. The bills are intended to improve law enforcement agencies&rsquo; ability to prevent gun-related deaths in their communities.</p> <p><span style="color: #0000ff"><b><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Assembly Bill 1014</span></a></b></span><span style="color: #0000ff">,</span> introduced in response to the recent shooting near the University of California, Santa Barbara, will allow family members of individuals displaying signs of mental instability to request a court order temporarily barring gun use and purchase of firearms. Modeled after California&rsquo;s domestic violence restraining order laws, the intent of this legislation is to potentially limit the access of mentally unstable individuals to firearms. The legislation allows a court to bar possession of firearms for up to 21 days, after which a hearing must be held.</p> <p>Additionally, Governor Brown signed <span style="color: #0000ff"><b><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Senate Bill 199</span></a></b></span>, which requires toy guns be brightly colored in response to tragic incidents involving children and adults wielding realistic-looking toy guns. Though critics claim this will simply lead to criminals painting their guns to confuse officers, the legislation aims to more readily identify toy guns in situations where lethal force is considered.</p> <p>In contrast, Governor Brown <i>vetoed</i> <span style="color: #0000ff"><b><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Senate Bill 808</span></a></b></span>, which would have required Californians to register firearms they make themselves. The bill arose out of fear of the increasing availability of homemade guns, including those cobbled together from spare parts and those produced by 3-D printers. Because these guns are not manufactured in traditional ways, they are often untraceable, frustrating law enforcement efforts to solve crimes. Governor Brown commented that adding a serial number to a homemade gun is unlikely to advance public safety.</p> <p>For more information regarding these bills or their implications for your agency and public safety department, please contact one of the authors of this legal alert listed at the right in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=489&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Municipal</span></a> and <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=2532&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Public Safety</span></a> group, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.<br /> <br /> <i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts01 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 of Changing Markets on Localism and Franchise Renewal and Cable Regulation in the Digital World<p>BB&amp;K Partner Joseph Van Eaton presented during a panel on &ldquo;Impacts of Changing Markets on Localism&rdquo; at the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors on Oct. 1 in St. Paul, Minn. A copy of his PowerPoint presentation, &ldquo;Mega-Mergers and Impacts on Local Government&rdquo; can be found by <span style="color: #0000ff"><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a></span><span>.<br /> <br /> In addition, BB&amp;K Partner Gerard Lavery Lederer presented &ldquo;Franchise Renewals, Transfers and Cable Regulation in the Digital World.&rdquo; A copy of his PowerPoint presentation can be found by <a target="_blank" href="88E17A/assets/files/Documents/Gerry Presentation to NATOA in 2014.pdf"><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.</span></p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements01 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Circuit: City's Pioneering Drug-Disposal Ordinance Does Not Violate Commerce Clause<p>If your medicine cabinet is filled with old prescriptions and other medications that you no longer want or can use, you might have asked: how and where should I get rid of these? <a href=""><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-1109" border="0" hspace="15" alt="Pills" vspace="15" align="right" src="" width="300" height="200" scale="0" /></a></p> <p>Local governments are beginning to provide an answer. Old medications are not only misused, they also pose dangers for the environment. Flushing pills or putting them in the trash can contaminate drinking water and cause other environmental problems.<br /> <br /> But disposal programs can be expensive. What&rsquo;s a local government to do?</p> <p>Alameda County, California, devised a solution. It passed a <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Safe Drug Disposal Ordinance</span></a> that requires any prescription drug producer who sells, offers for sale, or distributes drugs in the County to participate in a program to collect and dispose of the County&rsquo;s unwanted drugs.</p> <p>Manufacturers and distributors objected, however. They claimed that requiring them to pay for the program violates the dormant Commerce Clause because it discriminates against or directly regulates interstate commerce. Are they right?</p> <p>On Tuesday, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">the Ninth Circuit said</span></a> that the program does <em>not</em> violate the Commerce Clause.</p> <p>The court ruled that the ordinance does not discriminate against interstate commerce because the ordinance &ldquo;both on its face and in effect, applies to all manufacturers that make their drugs available in Alameda County&mdash;without respect to the geographic location of the manufacturer.&rdquo; The court explained that an ordinance that applies across-the-board &ldquo;provides no geographic advantages.&rdquo; The court also rejected the view that the ordinance impermissibly shifts costs to counties and states outside of Alameda so that there could be no check through the Alameda political process. The court noted that the ordinance would also require Alameda residents to pay more for their drugs.</p> <p>The court also ruled that the ordinance does not directly regulate interstate commerce, by controlling conduct beyond the county&rsquo;s borders. Among other things, the court noted that the County may regulate a business whose only connection to the County is interstate commerce:</p> <blockquote> <p>[T]here is nothing unusual or unconstitutional per se about a state or county regulating the in-state conduct of an out-of-state entity when the out-of-state entity chooses to engage the state or county through interstate commerce.</p> </blockquote> <p>Finally, the court ruled that the ordinance does not impose burdens that are clearly excessive in relation to its putative benefits under the test of <a target="_blank" href=";hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2006&amp;case=31785783815027646&amp;scilh=0"><span style="color: #0000ff"><em>Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc., </em>397 U.S. 137 (1970).</span></a> Because the court could find no evidence that the ordinance would affect the interstate &ldquo;flow of goods,&rdquo; it could not conclude that the ordinance would substantially burden interstate commerce. It noted that the challengers had stipulated to the program&rsquo;s benefits, that legislative determinations about safety are entitled to a strong presumption of validity, and that the fact that the County could run a program at its own expense would not nullify the program&rsquo;s benefits.</p> <p>Image courtesy of <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Flickr</span></a> by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"></span></a> (<a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">creative-commons license, no changes made</span></a>).</p>Blogs01 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Setting Compliance, Social Media in Politics and CEQA<p style="text-align: left">BB&amp;K Partners <b>Kelly Salt, </b><b>John Brown, Michelle Ouellette </b>and<b>&nbsp;</b>Of Counsel<b> Fernando Avila</b>&nbsp;and <strong>Sarah Owsowitz</strong> are among the presenters at the CSDA Annual Conference, which will be held from Sept. 30 to Oct. 2, 2014, in Palm Springs, Calif.</p> <p>BB&amp;K is a sponsor of this event.</p> <p><b>BB&amp;K Speakers</b><br /> <b><br /> Kelly Salt</b>, panelist, &ldquo;Rate Setting and the Role of Attorneys and Public Officials in Reviewing Cost-of-Service and Rate Studies for Compliance with Propositions 218 and 26&rdquo;<br /> Oct. 1<br /> 11 a.m. - 12:15 p.m.<br /> The burden of proof for compliance with the two propositions is on public agencies. Courts will exercise their independent judgment when reviewing whether a public agency has complied with the substantive and procedural requirements of Proposition 218 and whether a fee is a tax under Proposition 26. This presentation will discuss the process for preparing a cost-of-service and rate study, and issues that attorneys and public officials should address in reviewing these studies.</p> <p><b>John Brown</b>, moderator, &ldquo;Citizen Engagement: New Uses of Social Media and the Body Politic&rdquo;<br /> Oct. 1<br /> 11 a.m. - 12:15 p.m.<br /> This multi-media workshop will combine the perspectives of a general counsel, social media expert and two water district public affairs experts to discuss innovative uses of social media to facilitate constituent communications and promote important issues of public policy on a regional basis.<br /> <br /> Panelists: Director of Legislative &amp; Community Affairs Greg Morrison, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District;<br /> Public Information Associate Jennifer Poland, Hi-Desert Water District and President Teresa Warren, TW2 Marketing<br /> <br /> <b>Michelle Ouellette, Fernando Avila and&nbsp;Sarah Owsowitz</b>&nbsp;panelists, &ldquo;Special Districts and CEQA &ndash; CEQA from Your Perspective&rdquo;<br /> Oct. 1<br /> 3:45 &ndash; 4:45 p.m.<br /> The panel will provide a brief overview of CEQA as it applies to districts and then engage the audience in a wide-ranging conversation based on questions submitted prior to or during the panel about how CEQA works for districts.</p> <p>For more information or to register, visit the CSDA Annual Conference event page by <a href=""><font color="#0000ff">clicking here</font></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements01 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Protection: Facts and Fantasies<p>BB&amp;K Partner Franklin Adams will be the guest speaker at the Estate Planning Council of Riverside County&rsquo;s monthly meeting in October. He will be discussing &ldquo;Asset Protection: Facts and Fantasies.&rdquo;</p> <p>For more information or to register, please visit the Estate Planning Council of Riverside County by <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">clicking here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements01 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 of Appeal Issues Decision Clarifying the Applicability of Prevailing Wage Law to Offsite Fabrication of Materials;The California Court of Appeal has ruled that fabrication of materials for a public works project is not subject to California&rsquo;s prevailing wage law if it occurs at a &ldquo;permanent, offsite manufacturing facility, the location and existence of which is determined wholly without regard to the particular public works project.&rdquo; In <i>Sheet Metal Workers&rsquo; International Assn., Local 104 v. Duncan</i>, published Aug. 27, Russ Will Mechanical, Inc. was the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning subcontractor contracted to perform the HVAC component for a community college district project. <p>As part of the public works project, Russ Will fabricated sheet metal for various HVAC components at a permanent offsite facility it had operated for more than a decade. An employee of Russ Will filed a complaint with the Department of Industrial Relations claiming he should have received prevailing wages for his work fabricating sheet metal at the offsite facility. Following the DIR&rsquo;s administrative review of the matter, DIR&rsquo;s final coverage determination concluded that Russ Will was not required to pay prevailing wages. Local 104, which had participated in the DIR proceedings, then filed a petition for a writ of mandate in court challenging the final DIR coverage determination. Local 104&rsquo;s petition was granted, and the court returned the matter to the DIR. Russ Will then appealed.</p> <p><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">The Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision</span></a> clarifies and solidifies the rule consistently set forth in past DIR coverage determinations that prevailing wage requirements do not apply when the offsite fabrication takes place at a permanent, offsite manufacturing facility, where the location and existence of the facility has no relationship to the public works project in question. While this decision could be appealed to the California Supreme Court, for now, the <i>Sheet Metal Workers&rsquo; International</i> decision provides certainty that the payment of prevailing wages is not required in relation to a public agency&rsquo;s direct purchase of materials for a public works project from a permanent offsite manufacturing facility, so long as the facility&rsquo;s existence is not reliant on, or otherwise related to, the public works project.</p> <p>For more information about this case and how it may impact your agency, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=488&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Education</span></a>, <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=487&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Special Districts</span></a> or <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=489&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Municipal</span></a>practice groups, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <p><i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i></p>Legal Alerts30 Sep 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Law Expands Local Control Over Massage Industry<p>A new law substantially revises the state&rsquo;s regulation over the massage industry, including expanding cities&rsquo; and counties&rsquo; ability to regulate massage therapists and establishments within their jurisdictions. Importantly, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Assembly Bill 1147</span></a>, signed recently by Gov. Jerry Brown, allows local agencies to impose reasonable zoning, business licensing and health and safety requirements for massage businesses, with some exceptions. This law revises prior legislation, set to sunset this year, that restricted local agencies&rsquo; ability to regulate massage businesses, including entitling these businesses to special zoning protections.</p> <p>In 2008, the Legislature adopted <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Senate Bill 731</span></a>, which created a state-organized nonprofit organization to regulate the massage industry: the California Massage Therapy Council. Under SB 731, and later bills that revised its terms, the CAMTC was given the ability to issue voluntary massage therapist certifications. CAMTC-licensed therapists and establishments only employing CAMTC-licensed therapists were then entitled to special land use, operational and licensing benefits and protections. For example, massage businesses could only be subject to land use regulations that were uniformly applied to all other individuals and businesses providing professional services as defined in the Corporations Code. This legislation is set to expire on Jan. 1.</p> <p>SB 731 was widely criticized by local agencies as providing massage businesses with almost unprecedented protection from local zoning and land use authority, and interfering with local law enforcement efforts to close massage businesses allowing prostitution and other illegal activities. Given the upcoming sunset date for SB 731, the League of California Cities and other stakeholders worked tirelessly to restore local control. AB 1147 is the result of these efforts.</p> <p>In addition to revising internal CAMTC processes and permitting requirements, AB 1147 makes important changes regarding how local agencies can regulate and police massage businesses. Importantly, cities and counties can now adopt local zoning, business licensing and reasonable health and safety requirements with some relatively minor exceptions (examples noted below).</p> <p>From a land use perspective, local agencies cannot define massage establishments as adult businesses. In addition, they cannot require a special massage therapist permit or license for CAMTC-licensed therapists. Lastly, AB 1147 limits local agencies&rsquo; ability to prohibit massage techniques permitted by the CAMTC and state law, impose some dress code requirements for clients and therapists and require some internal building standards that interfere with client privacy or building security. AB 1147 will take effect on Jan. 1 and will sunset on Jan. 1, 2017, unless extended by later legislation.</p> <p>Local agencies that revised their massage ordinances due to SB 731 should consider amending their ordinance to take advantage of the new powers granted by AB 1147, especially the expanded zoning authority.</p> <p>For more details regarding the impact of this legislation, please contact one of the attorney authors of this legal alert listed at the right in the <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=489&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Municipal Law</span></a> practice group, or your <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K attorney</span></a>.</p> <i>Disclaimer: BB&amp;K legal alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqu&eacute;.</i>Legal Alerts29 Sep 2014 00:00:00 -0800 over water rates could limit popular tool to encourage conservation<p>By Fiona Smith<br /> <br /> A fight over water rates in the scenic hamlet of San Juan Capistrano is stirring concern among utilities around the state that fear it could threaten the widespread practice of charging high-volume users more than their thrifty neighbors to encourage conservation.</p> <p>A group of residents sued the city of San Juan Capistrano alleging its use of so-called 'tiered&quot; rates is not only unfair but that it violates Proposition 218, a 1996 constitutional amendment. Prop. 218 constrains local agencies' ability to raise revenue by requiring that charges for property-related services be proportional to the cost of providing the service. A 2008 state law specifically authorizes tiered conservation rates and a majority of the state's more than 200 water districts use such a scheme, according to California Department of Water Resource&amp; Supporters of tiered pricing point to a 2009 study in Water Resources Research that concluded that pricing was a more effective and economically efficient way to cut water use compared to command-and-control approaches such as barring hosing down driveways.</p> <p>The Capistrano Taxpayers Association Inc. alleges charging some residents more than others for their water is not proportional to the cost of the service. Under the city's system, residents are given a water budget based on the number of inhabitants and size of their property. If they exceed that water budget, they are charged at higher rates for the excess water.</p> <p>&hellip;</p> <p>Tiered pricing meets the &quot;proportionality&quot; requirement of Prop. 218 because high water users place higher costs on the system by demanding more water. That forces utilities to spend money seeking out new water supplies, said Kelly J. Salt, a partner with Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP who wrote the amicus brief on behalf of the local government groups including the Association of California Water Agencies.</p> <p>&hellip;</p> <p>The taxpayer group also objects to residential users being charged for the costs of building a recycled water facility that will provide nonpotable water for irrigation and other uses. Prop. 218 prohibits ratepayers for being charged for services &quot;not immediately available&quot; to them, it argues.</p> <p>That issue is extremely important as water agencies around the state try to increase water recycling and clean LID contaminated groundwater to increase nonpotable supplies, said Salt.</p> <p>If that part of the ruling is upheld, it will discourage the construction of recycled water facilities and make them prohibitively expensive by limiting who can be charged for the costs, Salt said. Residential customers benefit from these projects even if they don't use them because it lowers the demand for potable water and lessens the need to seek out expensive supplemental sources of drinking water, she said.</p> <i>To read the full article in the Daily Journal, which ran Sept. 29, 2014, <a target="_blank" href=";shNewsType=Search&amp;selOption=Search&amp;NewsId=7#section=tab3.cfm%3Fseloption%3DNEWS%26pubdate%3D01/01/2000%26shNewsType%3DSEARCH%26NewsId%3D937439%26sdivId%3Dtab3"><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a> (subscription required).</i>BB&K In The News29 Sep 2014 00:00:00 -0800