BOARD MEETING DATE: January 6, 2006
AGENDA NO. 25

South Bay Cities Council of Governments Proposal for State Legislation to Expand the AQMD Governing Board

SYNPOSIS:

The South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) is proposing state legislation in 2006 to expand the AQMD Governing Board by adding one additional city representative from each county, thus increasing the Board to 16 members. This item is to recommend that the AQMD Governing Board discuss and provide guidance to staff for further action.

COMMITTEE:

Legislative and Administrative, November 10, 2005, Discussed

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:

Establish position on Proposed SBCCOG State Legislation to expand AQMD Board.

Beatrice J.S. LaPisto-Kirtley, Chair
Legislative Committee

Background

Under existing law, the AQMD Board consists of 12 members, including one member appointed by the cities in the western region of the County of Los Angeles, and one member appointed by the cities in the eastern region of the County of Los Angeles. Those specified cities are required to organize a city selection committee and hold a public meeting in order to determine the appointment from each region. The selected representative must be voted in by both a majority of the cities, and a majority of population in those cities.

Additionally, existing law specifically defines the cities that comprise the western region of the County of Los Angeles, and those cities not specified as included in the western region are to be included in the eastern region for the purpose of appointing members to the AQMD Board. Since this requirement was chaptered into law, new cities that have been incorporated in western Los Angeles County are considered to be eastern sector cities.

South Bay Cities Council of Governments Proposal

The SBCCOG has developed a proposal to reconfigure the AQMD Governing Board by adding four additional city representatives to the existing Board. This includes one additional representative from each of the four counties in the AQMD’s jurisdiction, with the City of Los Angeles having its own Board Member. This would bring the total number of Board Members to 16. In December, the proposal, which also includes an unspecified realignment of the western and eastern sector cities, was submitted to legislative counsel in Sacramento to have bill language drafted. See attached Legislative Proposal.

The SBCCOG consists of 15 cities: Carson, El Segundo, Gardena, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Palos Verdes Estates, Torrance, and the Harbor City/San Pedro areas of the City of Los Angeles.

Discussion

The SBCCOG’s Proposal was discussed at the November meetings of the AQMD Board’s Legislative and Administrative committees; and the Home Rule Advisory Group. Further feedback was also received in December from the AQMD’s Local Government and Small Business Advisory Group and the Ethnic Community Advisory Group.

Also attached are recent actions taken on the SBCCOG Proposal by the Los Angeles City Council’s Environmental Quality & Waste Management Committee on December 12; the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) Major Projects Committee on December 15; and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments in Los Angeles County on December 7.

The various AQMD committee members, representing a wide spectrum of interest groups from all regions and all stakeholders, were generally opposed to the SBCCOG’s proposal. Some of the comments received are provided below.

• Larger boards are usually more staff-driven and the board is less involved in the actual decision making. Also, a quorum is more difficult to maintain with a larger governing body.
   
• If a restructure is made, it should be based on the level of exposure in the area, rather than population, because an area may be sparsely populated, but the exposure of the people living in the area is greater.
   
• Since the Inland Empire is receiving much of the effects of air pollution generated in the more western urbanized portions of the AQMD’s jurisdiction, it is unfair to dilute representation of the eastern region.
   
• Creating additional Board Members would also incur additional costs and raise fees, which would be a burden to the regulated community.
   
• It is better to form another advisory group composed of elected officials and city representatives who can provide input to the Board on air quality concerns within their communities.
   
• Expanding the Board to 16 or 20 members would make it more difficult for Board Members to reach agreement and consensus on issues, since approval needs to be secured by a majority of the members of the Board.
   
• Without expanding AQMD’s authority, this particular initiative makes less sense, but with expanded authority, it may have merit and is a topic for discussion and some serious consideration.
   
• No problem or issue has been identified that requires Board reconfiguration.
   
• No new benefits or air quality improvements are going to arise from expanding the Board.
   
• Because of demographics and the way the Board is configured today, the western sector cities of Los Angeles County have no opportunity to be represented if they disagree with the City of Los Angeles.
   
• The City of Los Angeles representative may not always represent the issues of the SBCCOG’s member cities.

The following three governmental organizations within the AQMD’s jurisdiction have also recently met, discussed and voted on the SBCCOG Proposal.

• The San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) Major Projects Committee voted on December 15 to support no change in the AQMD Board at this time, regarding the SBCCOG’s proposal.
   
• The Los Angeles City Council’s Committee on Environmental Quality & Waste Management voted on December 14 to support a resolution relative to SBCCOG’s Legislative Proposal to expand the AQMD Governing Board by four members.
   
• The Gateway Cities Council of Governments Board of Directors voted on December 7 to support the SBCCOG’s Proposal to expand the AQMD Governing Board by four members.

Recommendation

The Legislative Committee of the Governing Board recommends that the full Board establish a position of support, oppose or neutral on the SBCCOG proposal to expand the AQMD Governing Board. In addition, it is recommended that staff be directed to convey that position to the Legislature and other parties as warranted.

Attachment (DOC 36kb)
SBCCOG Legislative Proposal

/ / /