Best Best & Krieger News Feed Best and Krieger is a Full Service Law Firmen-us21 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800firmwise the FCC's New Wireless Facility Rules Impact California Cities<p>Best Best &amp; Krieger attorney Matthew Schettenhelm will present &ldquo;How the FCC&rsquo;s New Wireless Facility Rules Impact California Cities&rdquo; at the League of California Cities&rsquo; City Attorneys&rsquo; Spring Conference in Monterey, Calif. The presentation will discuss the FCC&rsquo;s new wireless facility rules, how they affect California cities and what California cities can do in response.</p> <p><strong>When</strong><br /> May 6-8, 2015</p> <p><strong>Where</strong><br /> Monterey, Calif.</p> <p>For more information, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements06 May 2015 00:00:00 -0800 and Transit Rights of Way: Understanding the Legal and Practical Issues<p>Avoid and identify pitfalls that can delay or sidetrack right of way acquisition.</p> <p>Acquiring rights of way for roadway and transit projects can be stressful and high stakes. Timely and cost effective project delivery is critical to any roadway or transit project's success. Delay in acquiring just one parcel can have ripple effects that may jeopardize funding and contract deadlines for the entire project. We will include an overview of compliance with federal property acquisition and relocation requirements, environmental regulations and review, legal descriptions, title work, appraisal, and the eminent domain process from the agency board room to the court room as well as teach you the do's and don'ts of right of way acquisition.</p> <p>BB&amp;K partners <b>James B. Gilpin</b> and <b>Kendall H. Macvey</b> will be speaking during this live webinar.</p> <p><b>When</b><br /> Thursday, Jan. 15, 2015<br /> 10 &ndash; 11:30 a.m. PST</p> <p>BB&amp;K guests receive 50 percent off registration.<br /> Register online: <a target="_blank" href=";p=15999"><span style="color: #0000ff">;p=15999</span></a><span style="color: #0000ff"><br /> </span>Call: 866-352-9539<br /> Discount code: T3775205<br /> Priority code: 15999</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 -0800 Elected Policy Briefing<p>Join Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP Partner Matthew &ldquo;Mal&rdquo; Richardson and a host of other public officials at the Association of California Cities Orange County &ldquo;Newly Elected Policy Briefing.&rdquo; The roundtable discussion topics include:</p> <ul> <li>Public Safety</li> <li>Zoning and Land Use</li> <li>Intergovernmental Relationships</li> <li>Budget Management</li> <li>Legislative Engagement</li> <li>The Role of the Policy Maker &ndash; the Role of the Staff</li> </ul> <p>State-mandated training will also be provided, free of charge for ACC-OC members, by BB&amp;K in AB1234 (Ethics) and AB1825 (Sexual Harassment).</p> <p><strong>When</strong><br /> Thursday, Dec. 11, 2014<br /> 9:30 a.m. &ndash; 5 p.m.</p> <p><strong>Where</strong><br /> IRWD Community Meeting Room<br /> 15500 Sand Canyon Ave.<br /> Irvine, CA 92618</p> <p>For more information or to register, <a target="_blank" href=";oseq=&amp;c=&amp;ch="><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements11 Dec 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Webinar: Labor & Employment Update 2014<p>Please join <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=491&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K Labor </span><font color="#0000ff">and Employment</font></a> law attorneys for a free webinar focusing on new legislation and case law impacting California employers - private and public.</p> <p><strong>What will be discussed:</strong></p> <ul type="disc"> <li align="left">New Legislation</li> <li align="left">Wage and Hour Law</li> <li align="left">Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation</li> <li align="left">Disability and Medical Leaves</li> <li align="left">&quot;Special Topic&quot; - Affordable Care Act - Cadillac Tax</li> <li align="left">Public Agency Case Update</li> </ul> <p><strong>Who should attend:</strong></p> <ul type="disc"> <li>Human resource professionals at both public agencies and private businesses</li> <li>General and in-house counsel</li> </ul> <p><strong>When:</strong><br /> Wednesday, December 10<br /> 9:30 - 11:30 a.m.&nbsp;PT</p> <p><strong>Credits:</strong><br /> This activity has been approved for minimum continuing legal education by the State Bar of California in the amount of 2 hours of General Participatory credit. Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP certifies that this activity conforms to the standards of approved educational activities prescribed by the rules and regulations of the State Bar of California governing minimum continuing legal education. Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP is a State Bar of California Approved Provider,#1035. PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT YOU SIGN THE RECORD OF ATTENDANCE AT THE TIME OF THE PRESENTATION, EMAIL BB&amp;K A COPY AND RETAIN A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ATTENDANCE FOR YOUR PERSONAL MCLE FILES. If you would like to receive MCLE credit for attending this webinar, please email <a href=""><u><span style="color: #0000ff"></span></u></a> prior to the webinar start time. <br /> <br /> For more information and to register for this webinar, click <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></a><strong><span>.<span style="display: none" id="1415212181788E"> </span></span></strong><br /> <br /> <strong>Contact Person:<br /> </strong>Jessy Asfahan, Best Best &amp; Krieger<br /> <a href=""><span style="color: #0000ff"> </span></a><br /> &nbsp;</p>Seminars and Webinars10 Dec 2014 00:00:00 -0800 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 Water Laws to a World of Water Scarcity<p>Best Best &amp; Krieger Managing Partner Eric Garner is one of the invited speakers to the United Nations Environment for Development 1st International Environment Forum for Basin Organizations in Nairobi, Kenya from Nov. 26&ndash;28, 2014. The Forum will bring together key stakeholders in the management of freshwater basins from all around the globe, such as ministers of water and the environment, heads of basin organizations and water directors, heads of national delegations to transboundary basin organizations, UN Agencies and other relevant international organizations, financial institutions, MEA Secretariats, civil society and academia.</p> <p>The primary objective of the Forum is to strengthen basin organizations as key building blocks for environmental governance. Basin Organizations are crucial in supporting the implementation of internationally agreed environmental goals and objectives embedded in many Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) as well as in national and basin-wide water management schemes.</p> <p>Eric will discuss &ldquo;Adapting Water Laws to a World of Water Scarcity&rdquo; during the Laws and Regulations Theme. The discussion will focus primarily on a) effective and adaptive legal and institutional frameworks to address the ever increasing challenges and complexities associated with managing water resources, and b) how basin organizations can positively contribute to the implementation of international water law, multilateral environmental agreements and internationally accepted environmental principles.</p> <p>For more information, please <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here.</span></a></p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements26 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Is Now a Crime to Help a Public Official Make a Contract that Holds Personal Financial Interest<p>An amendment to Government Code section 1090 now makes it a felony for any person to aid and abet a government official in violating the conflict of interest provisions of the Code. This amendment, made possible with the passage of SB 952, advances the ability of prosecutors to charge all persons, government officials and others who are knowingly involved in aiding and abetting, or directly participating in the making of a contract in which a government official is financially interested.</p> <p>During the past session, the Legislature passed SB 952, which Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law, amending the powerful and far reaching statute that prohibits a government official from being financially interested in a contract made in the official&rsquo;s capacity, or by the agency of which he or she is a member. Section 1090 provides felony criminal penalties, including state prison sentences, fines and a lifetime ban from holding office. Any contract made in violation of this law is void and the government retains all the benefits of the contract while recovering any payments or consideration provided pursuant to the contract.</p> <p>An earlier appellate decision, <i>D&rsquo;Amato v. Superior Court,</i> had cast some doubt on whether section 1090 criminal liability could be applied to someone other than a government official under an aiding and abetting theory. In <i>D&rsquo;Amato</i>, the Court of Appeal held that the Legislature intended that section 1090&rsquo;s liability extend only to an official having an interest in a contract approved by the body or board upon which he or she sits. This amendment to the statute now supersedes that conclusion.</p> <p>Now with aider and abettor liability explicitly provided for in section 1090, any person who knowingly engages in activity that aids and abets a public official in participating in the making a contract in which the official is financially interested will have shared criminal liability. This will sweep within the statute those who offer inducements or bribes for legislative action, as the inducement or bribe creates a financial interest in the contract for the public official.</p> <p>How might this new law apply in the real world? Imagine this scenario based on an actual case: <i>Hub City Solid Waste Services, Inc. v. City of Compton</i>. In this case, the principal of a company seeking to do business with the city provided campaign contributions and hired members of council members&rsquo; families with the understanding that the council members will vote in favor of a contract with the company. The council members then voted to approve a contract with the company. Under this scenario, not only the council members, but also the company principal, would be criminally liable under Government Code section 1090.</p> <p>The new law takes effect Jan. 1.</p> <p>For more information on this amendment or how it may affect your agency, please contact the attorney author 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 &amp; Ethics Compliance</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 Alerts20 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800's Not Easy Being (Legally) Green - Understanding Legal and Practical Issues Related to Green Infrastructure<p>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP Partner Shawn Hagerty is among the speakers at NACWA&rsquo;s three-day National Clean Water Law Seminar. He will be on a panel titled &ldquo;It&rsquo;s Not Easy Being (Legally) Green &ndash; Understanding Legal and Practical Issues Related to Green Infrastructure.&rdquo;</p> <p>The use of green infrastructure (GI) has rapidly become a mainstream, acceptable solution by both the municipal utility community and federal/state regulators to achieve &ndash; in conjunction with gray infrastructure &ndash; key CWA requirements. But what about the legal considerations associated with &ldquo;going green?&rdquo; Utilities must evaluate a number of different legal factors when using green infrastructure - especially on private property - such as zoning and land use regulations, easements with private owners, maintenance agreements, and liability concerns. There is also the issue of what happens if the GI doesn&rsquo;t work the way it is supposed to and permit terms are violated.</p> <p><strong>When</strong><br /> Thursday, Nov. 20, 2014<br /> 11 a.m.</p> <p><strong>Where</strong><br /> The Loews Don CeSar Hotel<br /> St. Pete Beach, Florida</p> <p>For more information or to register here, <a target="_blank" href=";view=article&amp;id=2023&amp;Itemid=535"><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements20 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Harassment Prevention Training<p>Employers with 50 or more employees, including temporary workers and independent contractors, are required to provide all supervisory employees two hours of sexual harassment prevention training every two years.</p> <p>The Chamber is hosting a sexual harassment prevention training seminar to provide local Riverside business leaders the opportunity to receive this legally required training. Joseph Ortiz, attorney at Best Best &amp; Krieger, will facilitate and lead this training seminar. Do not miss this opportunity to fulfill AB 1825 requirements and protect your business from potential future lawsuits.</p> <p><strong>When</strong><br /> Thursday, Nov. 20, 2014<br /> 10 a.m. &ndash; Noon</p> <p><strong>Where</strong><br /> Chamber Bourns Boardroom<br /> <br /> For more information or to register, <a target="_blank" href=";c=Qx2yj86jNqQg4u8db7fhTHb5NCGkVaPmuUZnP2S4bA796mCc4bj5dQ==&amp;ch=gF3tkPVc9pRDqs32WuF5olVFWdKDnrFxNJhu3ehpQbSX_ueaeLt7gA=="><font color="#0000ff">click here</font></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements20 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Corridor Market Update<p>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP Partner Stephen Stwora-Hail will be presenting &ldquo;680 Corridor Market Update&rdquo; at AEI Consultants&rsquo; 680 Exchange Networking Breakfast.</p> <p><strong>When</strong><br /> Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2014<br /> 8:30 &ndash; 10 a.m.</p> <p><strong>Where<br /> </strong>Scott&rsquo;s Seafood Bar &amp; Grill<br /> 1333 North California Blvd.<br /> Walnut Creek, CA 94596</p> <p>For more information or to register, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements19 Nov 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 Government, Industry Reps Mull Challenges to Section 6409(a)<p>Local government officials and those in the wireless industry are closely examining challenges to implementing section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, reports <i>Telecommunications Reports Daily</i>. In its coverage of a Nov. 14, 2014 Law Seminars International webinar, in which Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP Partner Gerard Lederer participated, TRD noted that the FCC has ordered that states and localities must act on applications to modify existing wireless tower or base stations within 60 days. If no action is taken during that time, the application is &ldquo;deemed granted.&rdquo; The new law takes effect in less than 90 days.</p> <p>It might be difficult for local governments to comply with the new rules by the given deadline because of the need for new procedures and forms, plus holidays and new officials taking office on Jan. 1.</p> <p>&ldquo;He also said that while the new rules could make &lsquo;things more efficient,&rsquo; he noted that localities are facing reduced resources due to tighter budgets that could make it harder to meet the 90-day timeframe,&rdquo; TRD reported.</p> <p>&ldquo;Mr. Lederer also said it is difficult to educate larger, more sophisticated localities about the new rules as well as smaller jurisdictions that might not even have their own attorneys. &lsquo;One size can never really fit all,&rsquo; he said,&rdquo; TRD said.</p> <p>Local agencies dislike that the wireless industry received what it wanted from the FCC, but still want state legislatures to change laws, Gerard said, according to TRD. &ldquo;People get put off a bit,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;That will cause difficulty.&rdquo;</p> <p>He also counseled those in the industry to not cite anonymous jurisdictions in their comments. &ldquo;There&rsquo;s nothing that makes us crazier than the anonymous allegation,&rdquo; Gerry said. &ldquo;Name the community. &hellip; Typically on each of these stories, there is another side.&rdquo;</p>BB&K In The News14 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Redevelopment Law Conflict-of-Interest Rules Apply to Successor Agencies<p>The California Attorney General recently opined that the conflict-of-interest rules under the Community Redevelopment Law will continue to apply despite the dissolution of redevelopment agencies. The rules apply to members of any successor agency governing board and may apply to city officials and employees who are required to participate in the approval of plans and policies for redevelopment project areas. In particular, the Attorney General Kamala Harris took the position that Health &amp; Safety Code section 33130 will continue to prohibit such officers and employees from acquiring property within a redevelopment project area.</p> <p>In 2011, the California Legislature passed ABx1 26, which directed that all redevelopment agencies be dissolved and provided for the creation of successor agencies charged with winding down the affairs of redevelopment agencies. ABx1 26 specifically vested in successor agencies all rights, powers, duties and obligations of redevelopment agencies which were not repealed, restricted or revised. Health and Safety Code section 33130 was not repealed, restricted or revised.</p> <p>In light of the dissolution of redevelopment agencies, however, the duties and obligations which section 33130 imposes are not clear. Section 33130 only applies to the formulation or approval of plans and policies for the redevelopment of project areas, but ABx1 26 bars such activities. Harris takes the position that, even though successor agencies generally may not undertake new obligations, section 33130 will still apply because successor agencies are specifically authorized to begin new redevelopment work in compliance with existing enforceable obligations, to carry out redevelopment work already begun and to approve plans for project areas under limited circumstances.</p> <p>Harris&rsquo; opinion explains that section 33130&rsquo;s prohibition on acquiring property <i>precludes</i> certain officials or employees from acquiring property within a project area, and, therefore, the rule applies even if the official or employee disqualifies himself or herself from participation in discussions involving the project area.</p> <p>There are three key exceptions to section 33130&rsquo;s firm rule. First, an officer or employee may purchase or lease property for personal residential use within the project area, provided that the agency certifies that no improvements or construction will be done on the property or that the improvements or construction are already complete. Second, an officer or employee may lease property for use in his or her principal business if the lease contains market rate terms and cannot be sublet at a higher rate. Third, an official may acquire property to participate as an owner or reenter into business if he or she held a similar interest for three years preceding the selection of the project area. Even if an exception applies, the official or employee must disclose the interest in the official minutes. If the official or employee owns property that was previously acquired, that fact must also be disclosed in the official minutes.</p> <p>Finally, Harris also opined that a board member may resign from the successor agency without resigning from the city council, even if the city council sits as the governing board of the successor agency. However, the opinion only specifically discusses the continuing redevelopment work that a successor agency is required to perform, and does not address any separate and distinct work required to be performed by city officials or employees. The constraints of section 33130 may still apply to a city council member notwithstanding resignation from the successor agency, depending on the city council&rsquo;s role in any ongoing redevelopment activities.</p> <p>For more information on the California Attorney General&rsquo;s opinion and how it may affect your agency, please contact the attorney author 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> <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 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Estate Law Partner Nancy Park Honored with Champion of Excellence Award by CREW Sacramento<p><b>SACRAMENTO, Calif.</b> - Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP Partner Nancy Park was awarded the Champion of Excellence Award today by the Sacramento chapter of Commercial Real Estate Women. According to CREW, the award honors those individuals who consistently deliver excellence in their personal and professional lives, and whose efforts advance the industry and show support for everything CREW Sacramento stands for.</p> <p>Park&rsquo;s association with CREW is long, and she has received acknowledgment from the organization at both the local and national levels, including the CREW-Sacramento Woman of Impact Award in 2008, the CREW-National Networking Award in 2001 and CREW Member of the Year, also in 2001. For several years, she lead the a joint effort between CREW-Sacramento and the Sacramento Girl Scouts to host a commercial real estate career day for teenage girls.</p> <p>Park represents private and public real estate entities, lenders and borrowers, landlords and tenants, and large and small businesses. Some of her private clients include institutional asset managers, agricultural product processors, ranch owners, manufacturing facilities, developers, movie/television studios, international and regional banks, and nature conservancies. Public clients include cities, special districts, joint powers authorities and hospitals, among others.</p> <p>Last year, she was named among the 2013 Northern California Real Estate Women of Influence by the <i>San Francisco Business Times</i>.</p> <p>&ldquo;Champions of Excellence honorees stand out from the crowd, at any stage in their career. They are passionate about our industry and innovative in their line of work,&rdquo; according to CREW. &ldquo;They inspire others through their leadership and vision. They believe our industry is strengthened when everyone gets a chance to play, and they seek opportunities to bring women and minorities to the table and advance their success.&rdquo;</p> <p>To learn more about CREW, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here.</span></a></p> <p align="center">###</p> <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 Twitter.</span></i></p>Press Releases13 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 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 Groundwater Legislation Update: Comments Recommended Regarding Groundwater Basin Prioritization<p>Under the new groundwater legislation, the California Department of Water Resources must establish the initial priority for each groundwater basin in the state no later than Jan. 31. Those basins that are ultimately designated as high or medium priority will be subject to groundwater sustainability plans to be adopted no later than Jan. 31, 2020, in some cases, or Jan. 31, 2022 in others.</p> <p>Preliminary priorities for each groundwater basin, including many sub-basins, have been compiled as part of DWR&rsquo;s California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) program. The listing of those preliminary priorities can be found <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></a>. Other information about groundwater basins can be found in DWR&rsquo;s <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Bulletin 118</span></a> (&ldquo;California&rsquo;s Groundwater&rdquo;).</p> <p>There is an expectation that most, if not all, of these preliminary priorities will be adopted officially by DWR early next year, barring information coming to light that challenges those preliminary priorities.</p> <p>If public agencies or others wish to dispute the preliminary high, medium, low or very low priority status of groundwater basins upon which they rely, comment letters should be submitted to DWR as soon as possible. In setting those priorities, DWR will examine not only water levels, water quality, extraction patterns, current demand and other technical information, but also the population overlying the basin, projected growth, irrigated acreage and other information.</p> <p>Agencies may also wish to submit comments to DWR regarding groundwater basin boundaries, particularly if there is scientific dispute about the precise location of such boundaries. Under the new legislation, basin boundaries will be set as identified in DWR <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Bulletin 118</span></a> unless a local agency requests that DWR revise boundaries and submits technical and other information supporting a boundary adjustment.</p> <p>Best Best &amp; Krieger attorneys are here to assist with the preparation of comment letters regarding groundwater basin prioritization and boundaries. For further information, please contact 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 and Natural Resources practice group</span></a> or <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">your 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> <b><i>Best Best &amp; Krieger&rsquo;s Water Rights</i></b><i> practice is a nationally recognized force in water law since James Krieger&rsquo;s significant role in implementing the California State Water Project in the 1960s. As general counsel to water providers, BB&amp;K represents dozens of public agencies that serve water to more than 21 million people, in addition to countless developer, agricultural and manufacturing clients. We regularly advise public agency and private clients on all aspects regarding allocation of scarce water supplies.</i>Legal Alerts12 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Questions after Oral Argument in T-Mobile v. Roswell<p>A local government&rsquo;s decision to deny a cell tower placement application must be &ldquo;in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record.&rdquo; But what exactly does that mean? The <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">U.S. Supreme Court</span></a> focused on that issue at oral argument Monday. The case, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">T-Mobile</span></a> v. Roswell, concerns a city letter stating only that Roswell, Georgia, had denied T-Mobile&rsquo;s application and that the hearing&rsquo;s minutes could be obtained from the city clerk. Is that enough?<br /> <br /> The argument focused on five questions that will play a key role in how the court resolves the case:<br /> <br /> <b><i>1. Does the local government need to articulate any reasons for its denial?</i></b><br /> <br /> The court appeared united in the view that the answer is &ldquo;yes.&rdquo; (Justice Clarence Thomas did not speak, however, per his typical practice.) Justice Elena Kagan noted that the need for reasons necessarily follows from the standard of review: &ldquo;[S]ubstantial evidence requires reasons.&rdquo; The city did not dispute the point.</p> <p>&hellip;</p> <p><i>To read the full article in Law360, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.</i></p>BB&K In The News12 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Legal Secretary - Los Angeles Office<p>Litigation Secretary &ndash; Qualified candidates must have at least 5 years recent California litigation experience, thorough knowledge of Superior and District court rules and procedures, transcription and calendaring. Must be comfortable in fast paced environment, detail oriented, work with little supervision, motivated, professional, reliable, possess excellent typing, grammar and organization skills, proficient in Word, Outlook, iManage.&nbsp;Superior salary/benefits package and excellent work environment.</p> <p>Qualified applicants are invited to apply online by clicking the link below. Applicants must attach a resume 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 href=";%3db8=8_CG"></a><br /> &nbsp;</p> <p>Please address your cover letter to:</p> <p><strong>Debbie Prior</strong></p> <p><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></p>Job Openings at BB&K12 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 legal authority for Ebola quarantines<p>In the wake of nurse Kati Hickox's refusal to be quarantined in her Maine home after returning from a trip treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone, federal, state and local governments are being forced to revisit their procedures for handling individuals traveling into their territories from Ebola stricken areas of the world. New protocols have been developed that attempt to balance public safety, individual civil rights, and political pressures of the time. The hysteria surrounding Ebola and its prevention has also required the reexamination of the authority by which the government may order and enforce the involuntary quarantines of its citizens.</p> <p><b>The Power to Quarantine</b></p> <p>Federal authority to quarantine falls under the commerce clause of U.S. Constitution, which states that Congress shall have the power &quot;[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states.&quot; A state's authority to quarantine individuals derives under their implied police powers - to protect the health, safety and welfare of persons within its border. Numerous cases have affirmed the principle that a state's police power embraces reasonable legislative regulations that protect public health and public safety. See <i>Gibbons v. Ogden</i>, 22 U.S. 1 (1824); <i>Lawton v. Steele</i>, 152 U.S. 133 (1894); <i>Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur u. Louisiana State Board</i>, 186 U.S. 380 (1902); <i>Jacobson u. Massachusetts</i>, 197 U.S. it (1905).</p> <p>In California, the state Legislature has passed statutes to assist in the containment of communicable diseases within its borders. For instance, under Health and Safety Code Section 120145, the California Department of Public Health may quarantine persons &quot;whenever in its judgment that action is necessary to protect or preserve the public health.&rdquo; To better reach the four corners of the state, the Legislature provides county health officers the authority to enforce quarantine orders, rules and regulations prescribed by the CDPH. With this authority, CDPH Director Dr. Ron Chapman recently issued an updated Ebola quarantine order for California.</p> <p>&hellip;</p> <p><i>To read the full article in the Daily Journal, which ran Nov. 10, 2014, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a> (subscription required).</i></p>BB&K In The News10 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 School desegregation chronicled in new book<p>In his new book &ldquo;No Easy Way: Integrating Riverside Schools &ndash; A Victory for Community,&rdquo; Best Best &amp; Krieger Partner Arthur L. Littleworth, a former Riverside school board president, discusses how an arson at a segregated school began &ldquo;the week of Hell&rdquo; and led to the eventual voluntary integration of the district&rsquo;s schools.</p> <p>Mr. Littleworth discusses the book and the decision to desegregate in an interview with the <i>Press-Enterprise</i>. The district decided to integrate the schools almost 50 years ago to reduce discrimination and &ldquo;to treat a Riverside community as one people,&rdquo; Mr. Littleworth told the <i>PE</i>. &ldquo;This hopefully remains.&rdquo;</p> <p>On Saturday, Nov. 15 at 1 p.m., Poly High School will be re-dedicating the Littleworth Theater with a timeline mural that includes highlights of Mr. Littleworth&rsquo;s life and the nation&rsquo;s history. All are welcome and Mr. Littleworth will be signing copies of his book, which will be available for purchase.</p> <p>To see the full article in the <i>Press-Enterprise</i>, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.</p>BB&K In The News10 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 First Year Law Student Diversity Fellowship/Scholarship Program<p>&nbsp;</p> <p><span style="background-color: #ffff00"><span style="font-size: larger"><strong>NOTE: APPLICATIONS WILL ONLY BE ACCEPTED FROM 12/1/14 TO 1/30/15.</strong></span></span></p> <p>Best Best &amp; Krieger LLP is committed to recruiting, hiring, developing, promoting and retaining attorneys and staff of diverse backgrounds. The value of diversity for our clients comes from the melding of differing experiences, cultures, talents, viewpoints and styles to drive creative and innovative solutions. Our diversity allows us to leverage different perspectives to approach complex legal issues in a way that provides the best outcome for our clients.</p> <p>With these goals in mind, BB&amp;K is pleased to offer our First Year Law Student Diversity Fellowship/Scholarship Program. This Program will provide the recipient with a paid summer associate position in one of our participating offices: Ontario, Riverside, Sacramento or San Diego. To qualify for the $7,500 scholarship, the recipient student must be invited and must return to BB&amp;K the following summer. The $7,500 scholarship will be paid following completion of the student&rsquo;s second summer with the firm.</p> <p>Description. The BB&amp;K First Year Law Student Diversity Fellowship/Scholarship Program is open to all first year law students enrolled and in good standing at an ABA accredited law school. Students with diverse backgrounds who demonstrate the potential to become an outstanding attorney at BB&amp;K are invited to apply. The successful candidate will be selected based on academic, personal and professional achievement.</p> <p>Please <a target="_blank" href=";%3db8=8_CG">Click here</a> to learn more about the program and to apply.</p> <p><strong>NOTE: APPLICATIONS WILL ONLY BE ACCEPTED FROM 12/1/14 TO 1/30/15.</strong></p>Job Openings at BB&K07 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 - Municipal Law - Ontario Office<p>We have an immediate opening for an attorney with a minimum of 4 years of transactional municipal and advisory law experience. Planning degree and/or extensive experience with planning, zoning and land use issues required. &nbsp;Experience attending legislative body meetings and with local tax, assessment and fee/rate setting under Propositions 13, 218 and 26 a plus.</p> <p>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.</p> <p><a target="_blank" href=";%3db8=8_CG"></a><br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p>Please address your cover letter to:</p> <p><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 /> <br /> <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></p>Job Openings at BB&K07 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Things that Fuel Negative Police Image Among the Public<p>Maintaining the positive image of the police has always been a challenge since the days of the first known police force dating back to the 1800s. With the advent of social media, this challenge is amplified exponentially. At a moment&rsquo;s notice, the misdeeds of one officer can go viral across the globe without any ability to mitigate or reconcile the damage.</p> <p>Part of this is just the cost of doing business in the digital age, but what about the part of the problem that can be influenced by altering human behavior? What are the most common daily activities that officers do to fuel a negative image?</p> <p>Sir Robert Peel said, &ldquo;Police must secure the willing cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.&rdquo;</p> <p>As fundamental and elementary as this all sounds, I would suggest that some police leaders in this modern era may have lost sight of these basics.</p> <p>&hellip;</p> <i>To read the full article on, which ran Nov. 6, 2014, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.</i>BB&K In The News06 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Criticize Wireless Infrastructure Order<p>A reporter for <i>Telecommunications Reports</i> was one of the attendees of the Best Best &amp; Krieger webinar &ldquo;New FCC Rules Will Require New Approach to Siting of Wireless Facilities.&rdquo; <a target="_blank" href=";an=34267&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">The free webinar on Nov. 5</span></a> was in response to the FCC&rsquo;s adoption of new rules that 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>BB&amp;K Partner Gerard Lavery Lederer told webinar attendees that the FCC could publish the order, adopted last month, in a &ldquo;Federal Register&rdquo; soon. After, parties have 30 days to file a petition for reconsideration and 60 days to file a petition for review in court, the TR reported. The rules take effect 90 days after publication in the Register. Gerard said there is consideration being given to creating working groups of clients to discuss whether to ask the FCC to reconsider portions of the order or file a court challenge.</p> <p>In the meantime, local agencies can begin preparing to implement the new rules, Gerard said. There are time concerns, he noted, especially with the holidays. The TR quoted him as saying, &ldquo;We understand that the timeframes are difficult.&rdquo;</p> <p>Matthew Schettenhelm, a BB&amp;K associate, raised concerns about the &ldquo;deemed granted&rdquo; remedy adopted by the FCC to implement section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, the TR reported. Matthew said a &ldquo;substantial constitutional question&rdquo; is raised by the 60-day requirement states and localities have to act.</p> To view the presentation slides, click <span style="color: #0000ff"><u><a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></a></u></span>.<br /> To view the webinar recording, click <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></a>.BB&K In The News05 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Pass Proposition 1 - Water Supply and Infrastructure Bond: Is Your Agency's Water Project Eligible for Funds?<p>On Tuesday, California voters passed Proposition 1, the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, which allocates $7.5 billion for a water quality, supply and infrastructure improvement program to help fund certain water projects.</p> <p>In an effort to address California&rsquo;s dwindling water supplies, the Act makes the following allocations:</p> <ul> <li>$520 million for projects to improve water quality and wastewater treatment, and to provide more reliable safe drinking water;</li> <li>$2.7 billion for water storage projects to be selected by the California Water Commission through a competitive ranking process;</li> <li>$1.495 billion for watershed protection and restoration projects;</li> <li>$900 million for groundwater cleanup and management;</li> <li>$810 million for integrated regional water management, water conservation and stormwater capture;</li> <li>$725 million for water recycling projects and facilities; and</li> <li>$395 million for flood management projects.&nbsp;</li> </ul> <p>In addition to other specific criteria under each project category, projects benefitting disadvantaged communities are given priority for funds under all of the categories.</p> <p>Agencies seeking Proposition 1 funding will need to evaluate how their projects will be prioritized and ranked for eligibility based on the criteria used for each category of funding. &nbsp;Among other criteria, the State will consider the availability of additional federal, local or private funding for eligible projects, and an evaluation of projects&rsquo; technological and economic feasibility. &nbsp;</p> <p>With more than 100 years of experience representing public agencies, and its national reputation on water and environmental issues, BB&amp;K is equipped to assist public agencies in their efforts to receive funding for water projects under the Act. Among other areas, BB&amp;K stands ready to assist in the following:</p> <ul> <li>Helping to determine which of your agency&rsquo;s water quality, supply and/or infrastructure projects may be eligible for funding under the Act, which review criteria will apply and whether the projects may be eligible for priority.</li> <li>Assessing whether a particular project is subject to cost-sharing requirements under the Act, and how the requirements may be satisfied.</li> <li>Ensuring that projects comply with the limitations placed on funds and how funds received under the Act may be used by agencies.</li> <li>Assisting agencies with public consultation, notice, public hearing and other public outreach to comply with all open meeting/public hearing/notice requirements.</li> <li>California Environmental Quality Act, review of approved projects.</li> </ul> <p>For more information about how&nbsp;this bond&nbsp;may 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> or <a target="_blank" href=";LPA=487&amp;format=xml"><span style="color: #0000ff">Special Districts</span></a> practice groups, or <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">your 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 Alerts05 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 FCC Rules Will Require New Approach to Siting of Wireless Facilities<p>The FCC adopted 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 href=";LPA=456&amp;format=xml" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0000ff">BB&amp;K telecommunications</span></a> attorneys and their&nbsp;co-sponsor, the&nbsp;American Planning Association, provided 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 covered: </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>Audience:</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 /> <br /> <strong>Materials and Recording</strong>:<br /> To view the presentation slides, click <u><span style="color: #0000ff"><a href="" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: #0000ff">here</span></u></a></span></u>.<br /> To view the webinar recording, click <a href="" target="_blank"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255);"><u>here</u></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 of $7.5B water bond up to voters<p>On Tuesday, California voters will decide whether to adopt Proposition 1. The proposition &shy;called the Water, Quality, Supply and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2o14 - would make S7.5 billion available for urgently needed for water storage, infrastructure rehabilitation, and other projects, many of which have taken on new importance given current drought conditions. A recent Public Policy Institute of California poll found that 56 percent of potential voters support Prop. 1, while only 32 percent oppose.</p> <p>Prop. 1, if approved, will authorize the state to issue bonds and prepare guidelines regarding the projects that will be eligible for a share of the S7.5 billion. The water bond replaces a previous $7.5 billion water bond proposal that never made it to the ballot.</p> <p>If the water bond is adopted, projects that leverage private, federal or local funding, or projects that produce the greatest public benefit, will get funding priority. Projects that employ new or innovative technologies or practices will get special consideration. In addition, substantial bond funding is reserved for disadvantaged communities and economically distressed areas. The water bond may also support projects that lack multiple sources of funding (i.e., those without local matching funding).</p> <p><i>To read the full article in the Daily Journal, which ran Nov. 3, 2014, <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>&nbsp;(subscription required).</i></p>BB&K In The News03 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 in Law: Enjoy the party, but minimize the risks<p>Every year about this time, employers are knee-deep in menus and decorations as they plan holiday events for employees &ndash; ranging from in-the-office celebrations to lavish parties at fancy locations. Inevitably, some things go awry. And, too often, lawsuits follow.</p> <p>Regardless of location or size, here are a few tips to keep in mind so employers can enjoy the holidays but minimize their risks.</p> <p>The first and most obvious: Think carefully about whether or not alcohol should be served, and, if it is going to be served, how to deal with possible consequences. Alcohol lowers inhibitions &ndash; often resulting in sexual harassment complaints against partygoers whose language or physical conduct got out of hand after too much to drink. Consider inviting spouses and significant others &ndash; misbehavior is less likely if someone important is watching!</p> <p>Alcohol can also lead to injuries &ndash; at the party, and, often worse, after the party. Great care must be taken to make sure that no employee leaves a company party while intoxicated and then gets into an automobile accident.</p> <p>Last year, a California Court of Appeal found Marriott International liable when an employee became intoxicated at an annual holiday party and then had an accident after leaving the event when he drove more than 100 mph and collided with another car, killing the other driver. This liability can even extend where, with the employer&rsquo;s knowledge and implied consent, a non-intoxicated employee leaves the company party to go to an &ldquo;after-party&rdquo; where they become intoxicated and have an accident.</p> <p>Because of the possible liability, an employer should consider several steps. Most obviously, don&rsquo;t serve alcohol at all. If alcohol is served, have a professional bartender or server be responsible for providing the alcohol, and make sure they clearly know that they have the right to refuse to serve anyone who appears impaired. While some companies will use drink tickets to try to limit the service of alcohol, it is common for nondrinkers to give their tickets to other employees who do drink.</p> <p>At any party where alcohol will be served, make sure that alternative transportation is available. One method is to ask some employees to serve as designated drivers. Have the volunteers work in pairs, one to drive the impaired employee home, and the other to follow in another car to give the designated driver a ride back.</p> <p>Finally, have a written holiday party policy in place, and make sure that the employees read and sign it in advance. The policy should clearly state that the company wants everyone to enjoy the event, but that there are specific rules that must be followed before, during and after the event &ndash; particularly regarding alcohol.</p> <p>One relatively new holiday party issue concerns the taking of photographs and the use of social media. It has become completely routine for employees to utilize their phones and other devices to photograph and record at holiday parties and to upload their photos and videos to sites such as Facebook and YouTube.</p> <p>Often, in the light of day, what is uploaded is at minimum unflattering and can be damaging to employees and the reputation of the company. (Picture an over-served employee posing in a very unflattering manner right in front of the company logo.) What can (and can&rsquo;t) you do about this?</p> <p>As tempting as it might be, you can&rsquo;t usually ban either the taking of photos or the uploading of them to social media sites. Besides damaging morale, it is possible that you could violate Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. In the past, the National Labor Relations Board, which enforces the act, has held that prohibiting photography illegally restricts the right of employees to discuss working conditions.</p> <p>Similarly, you can&rsquo;t discipline employees for posting photos online, even if they put the company in a bad light. You also can&rsquo;t try to delete employee photos from online sites, as that probably violates the Stored Communications Act. You can delete photos and comments from the company website &ndash; but still be careful about having that action also be considered a violation of Section 7 of the NLRA.</p> <p>In these challenging times, having a company holiday party requires thought and planning. Be sure you know and trust the persons who will plan the party, and that they take all risks into consideration.</p> <i>*This article first appeared in <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">The Press-Enterprise</span></a> on Nov. 1 , 2014. Republished with permission.</i>BB&K In The News01 Nov 2014 00:00:00 -0800 Action Claims: Gluing Together Systemwide Judicial Relief<p>The award of class action certification is often the gateway for obtaining lifesaving systemwide judicial relief in broken correctional health care systems. It also can be the beginning of a decades-long, burdensome and inefficient route to reform. No matter what your perspective may be, the approval of class certification is a pivotal moment when a few individuals&rsquo; claims are recognized as more than an aggregation of disparate grievances and are instead litigated as a common contention applicable to a broader group, requiring a common remedy.</p> <p>In litigation brought under the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the importance of class action certification can&rsquo;t be overstated because, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, judicial relief can &ldquo;extend no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right of a particular plaintiff or plaintiffs.&rdquo; Naturally, the scope of a remedy tailored for all inmates in a correctional system will be vastly different from a remedy tailored for an individual inmate or a handful of inmates.</p> <p>Recently, in <i>Parsons v. Ryan</i>, an ongoing case brought by Arizona inmates against senior officials in the Arizona Department of Corrections, the ADC officials asserted an argument, as characterized by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, that &ldquo;Eighth Amendment claims can never be brought in the form of a class action.&rdquo; This argument, if successful, would end impact litigation in the prisons as we know it. To understand the issue and the decision reached by the Ninth Circuit, some background about class actions is necessary.</p> <p><b>Requirements for Class Certification</b></p> <p>Class certification is governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Under Rule 23(a), a party seeking certification of a class or subclass must satisfy four requirements:<br /> &nbsp;</p> <ol> <li>The class must be so numerous that including all individual members as named plaintiffs is impracticable.</li> <li>There must be questions of law or fact common to the class.</li> <li>The claims or defenses of the representative parties must be typical of the claims or defenses of the class.</li> <li>The representative parties must be able to fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.</li> </ol> <p>These requirements are often referred to, respectively, as &ldquo;numerosity,&rdquo; &ldquo;commonality,&rdquo; &ldquo;typicality&rdquo; and &ldquo;adequacy of representation.&rdquo;</p> <p>The proposed class must also satisfy one of three subsections in Rule 23(b), which defines different types of classes. One of those subsections, Rule 23(b)(2), is typically used for the certification of civil rights actions. It requires that the party opposing the class (e.g., prison officials) acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that judicial relief is appropriate for the class as a whole.</p> <p>In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court raised the bar for class certification in the widely publicized case of <i>Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes. In Wal-Mart</i>, the district court certified a class consisting of all of Wal-Mart&rsquo;s 1.5 million female employees in a case claiming discriminatory employment practices. The employees did not allege that Wal-Mart maintained an express policy discriminating against women. Rather, the employees asserted that local managers&rsquo; discretion over pay and promotion was exercised disproportionately in favor of men, and Wal-Mart&rsquo;s failure to limit its managers&rsquo; authority amounted to unlawful discrimination. In support of their claim, the employees presented statistical evidence of pay and promotion disparities, anecdotal evidence of discrimination in numerous cases and expert testimony of a corporate culture making stores vulnerable to gender bias.</p> <p>Despite the evidence presented, the court found the award of class certification unsupported. The court acknowledged a general policy of allowing managerial discretion, which may have resulted in a number of independent discriminatory acts. But the court found that the employees failed to offer significant proof that Wal-Mart operated under a general policy of discrimination. Thus, the employees&rsquo; claims failed to show commonality or &ldquo;some glue holding together&rdquo; the local managers&rsquo; alleged discriminatory decisions. The court explained that to show commonality, plaintiffs must demonstrate that the class members have suffered the same injury&mdash;which means more than just suffering a violation of the same law. Plaintiffs&rsquo; claims must depend on a common contention capable of classwide resolution, which means that &ldquo;determination of its truth or falsity will resolve an issue that is central to the validity of each one of the claims in one stroke.&rdquo;</p> <p>In the context of correctional health care litigation, <i>Wal-Mart</i> underscores that inmates cannot obtain class certification merely by showing widespread constitutional violations across the system. Some further commonality between the inmates&rsquo; claims must be shown, which brings us back to <i>Parsons v. Ryan</i>.</p> <p><b>Statewide Policies: The &lsquo;Glue&rsquo; of Commonality</b></p> <p>The inmates in <i>Parsons</i> complained that numerous statewide policies and practices governing health care and conditions in isolation cells exposed them to a substantial risk of harm to which the ADC officials were indifferent. The inmates supported their complaint with detailed factual allegations of statewide policies and practices related to inadequate staffing, delays and denials of medical care, substandard dental care, failures to provide therapies for the mentally ill and detention of inmates in isolation for months or years without outdoor exercise or meaningful interaction with others. The district court granted the inmates motion for class certification, specifying a class of &ldquo;[a]ll prisoners who are now, or will in the future be, subject to the medical, mental health, and dental care policies and procedures of the ADC.&rdquo; It also certified a subclass of &ldquo;[a]ll prisoners who are now, or will in the future be, subjected by the ADC to isolation, defined as confinement in a cell for 22 hours or more each day or confinement in [certain housing unit].&rdquo;</p> <p>The ADC officials appealed from the district court&rsquo;s award of class action certification, principally arguing that the district court erred in concluding that the inmates possessed commonality. Citing the Supreme Court&rsquo;s decision in <i>Wal-Mart</i>, the ADC officials asserted &ldquo;Eighth Amendment health care and conditions-of-confinement claims are inherently case specific and turn on many individual inquiries. That fact is an insurmountable hurdle for a commonality finding because <i>Wal-Mart</i> instructs that dissimilarities between class members &lsquo;impede generation of common answers.&rsquo;&rdquo; Said another way, the ADC officials argued that the inmates failed to satisfy the commonality requirement because a systemic constitutional violation of the sort alleged by the inmates is merely a collection of individual constitutional violations, each of which depends on the particular facts and circumstances of each case.</p> <p>The Ninth Circuit rejected the ADC officials&rsquo; broad attack on inmates&rsquo; ability to bring class actions. It distinguished claims alleging deficient care provided on previous occasions, or to particular inmates, from the kind of claim asserted by the inmates in Parsons, in which the inmates made a future-oriented claim based on systemwide deficiencies. Specifically, the inmates complained that all inmates in ADC custody are exposed to the same injury&mdash;a substantial present and future risk of serious harm&mdash;as a result of ADC policies and practices of statewide application.</p> <p>The court pointed to 10 statewide ADC policies and practices, to which all ADC inmates are exposed, which the court considered the &ldquo;glue&rdquo; holding together the class. All members of the class, as explained by the court, are subject identically to those same policies and practices. Additionally, the constitutionality of each policy and practice (i.e., whether it creates a systemic, substantial risk of harm to which the defendants are deliberately indifferent) &ldquo;can be answered in a single stroke.&rdquo;</p> <p>By way of example, the court discussed the inmates&rsquo; claim that the ADC officials maintain an unconstitutional policy and practice of severe understaffing across all ADC medical facilities. This allegation, according to the court, presented a question of law and fact common to all ADC inmates. Because the inmates alleged that every single inmate is placed at substantial risk of future harm due to the general unavailability of adequate care, the question of whether the ADC&rsquo;s staffing policies pose a risk of serious harm to all ADC prisoners is a common contention answerable as to the entire class at the same time. An inmate-by-inmate inquiry is unnecessary. &ldquo;Either ADC employs enough nurses and doctors to provide adequate care to all of its inmates or it does not ...&rdquo;</p> <p>While the Ninth Circuit&rsquo;s decision affirming the continuing viability of inmate class actions is not precedential throughout the United States, similar post-<i>Wal-Mart</i> decisions have been reached in lower courts in several states. Greater scrutiny of class claims can be expected. But it seems likely that class actions in correctional health care litigation will not come unglued.</p> <p><a href="88E17A/assets/files/Documents/28-4 Goldman.pdf"><span style="color: #0000ff">Click here</span></a> to see a .pdf of the article.</p> <i>Reprinted with permission from the <a target="_blank" href=""><span style="color: #0000ff">Fall 2014 issue of CorrectCare</span></a>, the quarterly magazine of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care. All rights reserved.</i>BB&K In The News31 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0800 in Drought: Development, Legislation and Litigation<p>BB&amp;K Managing Partner <b>Eric Garner</b>, who was the program chair of the event, and Partners <b>Paeter Garcia</b> and <b>Kelly Salt</b> participated 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&nbsp;helped 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&nbsp;provided their insight on the legal and policy issues facing the state&rsquo;s surface water, groundwater and alternative water supplies.</p> <p><b>BB&amp;K Speakers:</b><br /> <br /> Eric Garner delivered the event&rsquo;s opening introduction and overview at 9 a.m. At 11:30 a.m., he moderated the discussion &ldquo;The Groundwater Conundrum,&rdquo; which explored 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 appeared as a panelist at 3 p.m. for a discussion titled, &ldquo;The Perfect Non-Storm: Permitting Development in Drought Conditions.&rdquo; Topics discussed included:</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> <br type="_moz" /> To see Paeter's PowerPoint presentation, <a target="_blank" href="88E17A/assets/files/Documents/Garcia PP.pdf"><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.<br /> <br type="_moz" /> <p>Kelly Salt participated on a panel at 4 p.m. called, &ldquo;Pricing the Way through a Water Shortage.&rdquo; Issues covered included:</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> <br /> To see Kelly's PowerPoint presentation, <a target="_blank" href="88E17A/assets/files/Documents/Salt PP.pdf"><span style="color: #0000ff">click here</span></a>.<br type="_moz" /> <p><b>Credits: </b><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&nbsp; 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 Access to Public Rights-of-Way<p>BB&amp;K attorneys Gail Karish and Matthew Schettenhelm&nbsp;presented Lorman Education Services&rsquo; &ldquo;Private Access to Public Rights-of-Way.&rdquo; During this webinar, the audience learned to increase their proficiency in the private use of rights-of-ways and&nbsp;were 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 benefited 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><b>When</b><br /> Oct. 29, 014<br /> 10 &ndash; 11:30 a.m. (PST)<br /> &nbsp;</p>Conferences & Speaking Engagements29 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 Requirements of Filing Officers and Officials<p>BB&amp;K Senior Paralegal Dianna Valdez hosted 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 discussed:</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>Audience:</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&nbsp;was held&nbsp;at&nbsp;<span style="color: #0000ff"><a target="_blank" href="">BB&amp;K offices</a></span> throughout California.</p> <p><strong>Per Person Cost: $125</strong><br /> Clients who have signed off and paid for the new Pulic Policy &amp; Ethics program received the discounted price of $75 per person.<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 spoke&nbsp;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 developed 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, 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 presented &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 discussed 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, 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> presented &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 was &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, 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 moderated a panel presented by the International Council of Shopping Centers that discussed 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. The panelists are responsible for designing, developing, marketing and leasing this unique space. They shared 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 was a reception&nbsp;for&nbsp;networking 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, 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 Business of Water and Environmental Lessons from Nuclear Disasters<p>BB&amp;K Partner Eric Garner was 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 discussed methods that private companies are undertaking on their own efforts to protect water supplies essentials to their business models. The panel also discussed 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, co-moderated &ldquo;Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima: lessons learned and being learned.&rdquo; This session explored the legal lessons that we have learned as a result of the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents. In particular, it addressed how the legal community has responded to these incidents from a liability, regulatory and contractual perspective. It also addressed 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 was 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 discussed 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&nbsp;was 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 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 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