HomeMy WebLinkAboutAmicus Curiae Briefs - City Attorneys Office - City Council Council/Agency Meeting Held: -7 -7-y 3
Deferred/Continued to:
Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied City Clerk's Signature
Council Meeting Date: July 7, 2003 Department ID Number: CA 03-06
CITY OF HUNTINGTON. BEACH
REQUEST FOR,O ON
ti
SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR CONNIE BOARDMAN AND MEMBERS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL
SUBMITTED BY: JENNIFER McGRAT(=#! City Attorney
PREPARED BY: JENNIFER McGRATI Ity Attorney 10
SUBJECT: Establish City Council Policy Regarding Amicus Curiae Briefs
0
S tatement of Issue,Funding Source, Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s)
Statement of Issue: Should the City Council modify its current policy regarding amicus
curiae briefs?
Funding Source: Not applicable.
Recommended Action:
Establish City Council amicus curiae policy as follows:
1. City Attorney to review amicus curiae requests and prepare a recommendation for City
Council consideration; and
2. In the event time constraints prohibit full City Council consideration, the Legal Affairs
Committee is authorized to make a final decision.
Alternative Action(s): Do not modify current City Council amicus curiae policy.
RCA ROUTING SHEET
INITIATING DEPARTMENT: CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING AMICUS CURIAE
BRIEFS
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 7, 2003
RCA-.ATTACHMENTS. x. STATUS;..
Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable
Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable
Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Not Applicable
Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable)
(Signed in full by the City Attome ) Not Applicable
Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc.
(Approved as to form by City Attome Not Applicable
Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable
Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable
Staff Report If applicable) Not Applicable
Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable
Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable
EXPLANATION--FOR:MIS,SING ATTACHMENTS
REVIEWED RETURNED`; FORWARDED
Administrative Staff
Assistant City Administrator Initial
City Administrator Initial
City Clerk
EXPLANATION FOR-,RETURN PjTEM:
/ � ve i6 i� Iub Q c14
(Below
• . For Only)
RCA Author: J. McGrath
REQUEST FOR ACTION
MEETING DATE: July 7, 2003 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CA 03-06
Analysis:
Per the attached minutes, the City Council adopted a policy in October 1996 authorizing the
City Attorney to determine whether to join amicus curiae briefs, subject to the advice of the
Assistant City Administrator. Amicus curiae are requests for support for a particular position
in a pending case. Prior to November 2002, the City routinely received requests from the
League of California Cities for amicus curiae support; however, the League of California
Cities has recently adopted a new policy wherein the League does not seek the support of
specific cities except in unusual circumstances. A copy of the League of California Cities
Legal Advocacy Policy is attached for your review.
Based on this change in League policy, the City receives very few direct requests for amicus
support. In fact, the only requests the City currently receives are for cases wherein the
League has either chosen to not take a position or the League has not been requested to
take a position.
Direct amicus curiae requests tend to be on issues that are more limited in scope that should
reflect the policy determination of the full City Council.
Environmental Status:
Attachment(s):
City Clerk's
Page Number No. Description
1. Minutes of City Council Meeting of 10/7/96.
2. League of California Cities Legal Advocacy Policy
RCA Author: J. McGrath
G:\RCA\2003\Amicus Curiae Policy.DOT -2- 6/6/2003 3:25 PM
ATTACHMENT NO . 1
l�1,
10/07/96 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 23
A motion was made by Garofalo, second Dettloff, to adopt Resolution No. 96-93 - "A Resolution Of
The City Council Of The City Of Huntington Beach Certifying That The Final Environmental Impact
Report (No. 96-2) For The Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project Has Been Prepared,
Circulated And Completed In Compliance With CEQA And State Guidelines For CEQA And That
The City Council Has Reviewed And Considered The Information Contained Therein." The motion
carried by the following roll call vote:
. 1
AYES: Harman, Leipzig, Bauer, Sullivan, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
(_City Council City Council Policy Regarding Amicus Curiae Briefs -Approved As Amended
(100.10)
The City Council presented a communication from the City Attorney requesting Council direction
regarding whether the City Council should review amicus curiae briefs and decide whether the City
of Huntington Beach should join in support of them.
Following discussion, a motion was made by Harman, second Green, to approve the policy
recommended by the Legal Affairs Committee as set forth on Page No. 3 of the Request for Council
Action from the City Attorney dated October 7, 1996 as follows:
That the City Council not get actively involved in amicus curiae briefs. Further, when the City.
Attorney receives a request to join in support of an amicus brief, she will copy the information to the
Assistant City Administrator with the City Attorney's opinion supporting or rejecting the request for
amicus support. The Assistant City Administrator has five working days in which to respond to the
City Attorney with comments in support of or against the request. The City Attorney has the option
to support or reject the Assistant City Administrator's position and has the final determination as to
whether to join in support of an amicus curiae brief.
The motion made by Harman, second Green, carried by unanimous vote.
(City Council) Ordinance No. 3335 - Adopted - Creates The Citizen Participation Advisory
Board By Consolidating The Citizen's Advisory Board And The Human Resources Board
(640.10)
The City Council considered Ordinance No. 3335 for adoption - "An Ordinance Of The City Of
Huntington Beach Creating The Citizen Participation Advisory Board By Consolidating The Citizen's
Advisory Board And Human Resources Board And Repealing Huntington Beach Municipal Code
Chapters 2.99 And 2.103."
Following a reading by title, a motion was made by Garofalo, second Green, to adopt Ordinance
No. 3335. The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Harman, Leipzig, Bauer, Sullivan, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
560
ATTACHMENT NO . 2
League of California Cities
Legal Advocacy Policy
(Approved 11122102)
Purpose of Program
The goal of the League's legal advocacy program is to advocate in support of such principles as:
1) Local control,
2) Protection of local public funds, and
3) Judicial deference to policy determinations by local governing bodies.
Such advocacy occurs primarily before the appellate courts and in response to requests for input
on Attorney General opinions.
Guiding Principles
The League weighs in.on legal issues when the League's participation is likely to affirmatively
advance cities' collective legal interests by establishing legal precedent that will help cities more
effectively serve their communities. The committee's charge is to identify those cases and
Attorney General opinions that are of such significance on a statewide basis as to merit the
collective investment of city resources through the League to participate.
Generally, for the League to become involved in the resolution of a legal issue, cities should
agree on what the preferred outcome of the dispute should be and no city should be adversely
affected by the League's legal advocacy efforts. In rare cases,the League will get involved in--
litigation or Attorney General opinions where cities do not have a common interest in the same
outcome; the League will become involved in such issues only after full League Board
consideration and approval.
Whenever possible, and to maximize the effective use of limited resources, the League will
collaborate with other local agency associations and organizations to achieve mutually desired
legal outcomes.
Scope of Committee Advice
The League receives advice on matters relating to litigation affecting cities' interests from its
Legal Advocacy Committee. This advice includes but is not limited to:
• Whether the League should initiate litigation or participate in litigation as an amicus
curiae;
• Whether the League should coordinate litigation activities among interested cities or
encourage cities to participate as amici curiae in litigation; and
• Whether the League or interested cities should weigh in on a request for input on an
Attorney General opinion request.
"Participate as amicus curiae" includes seeking appellate review of an adverse decision and
requesting publication or decertification from publication of judicial opinions.Requests for
League assistance shall be directed to the Legal Advocacy Committee for its recommendations
and reasons.
Analysis of When the League's Name Should Go on an Amicus Brief
Those requesting assistance will be given the opportunity to specify whether they prefer the
League's name on briefs or those of participating cities, although such preference is not binding
on the League or the Legal Advocacy Committee.
In determining whether the League's name should go on a brief, the Legal Advocacy Committee
should evaluate the significance of the legal issue at stake in a case in light of the overall
purposes of the legal advocacy program (see above). Amicus briefs in cases of major
significance to a large number of cities(including cases involving charter city authority) should
generally bear the League name (unless the requestor specifies a preference for an amicus brief
filed by joining cities). Amicus briefs in cases that involve important legal issues of interest to a
small,but significant, number of cities should be filed on behalf of those cities.
Authorization and Reports
The following actions require League Board approval:
1. Recommendations that the League initiate litigation or coordinate litigation among
interested cities;
2. Recommendations that the League participate as amicus curiae in litigation on full-blown
briefs(non-letter briefs); and
3. Recommendations that the League encourage city joinder in amicus briefs when one or
more cities have an interest adverse to the position recommended.
Recommendations for all other forms of legal advocacy activities shall be made to the League's
executive committee for approval. The executive committee may, in its discretion, consult with
the full League Board.
The League Board will receive regular reports on all legal advocacy activities.
Committee Membership and Organization
The Legal Advocacy Committee shall be comprised of at least one city attorney representative
from each of the League's regional divisions and the four largest cities in the state. The
League's city attorneys department shall adopt further procedures and guidelines for the Legal
Advocacy Committee's composition and operations, consistent with this policy.
G:\Legal\LAC(Legal Advocacy)\BOARD\Legal Advocacy Committee Final.doc
Brockway, Connie
From: McGrath, Jennifer
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 1:55 PM
To: Brockway, Connie
Subject: RE: amicus policy
I apologize, I thought you were discussing items to date and not the implementation of the new amicus policy. You are
correct. The new amicus policy will give the Legal Affairs Committee a limited ability to make a final decision which will
then be reported out similarly to the intergovernmental relations committee.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brockway,Connie
Sent: Monday,July 07, 2003 1:42 PM
To: McGrath,Jennifer
Subject: RE: amicus policy
The only question I had was whether action of council would be reflected in council minutes and 1 think you have said
yes that it would be. I do not know about closed sessions etc of the Legal Affairs Committee. My question was when
they have to take a position in a hurry---do they take that position and then afterwards come back and report to
council. Like the Intergov. Relations Committee does.
Connie
-----Original Message-----
From: McGrath,Jennifer
Sent: Monday,July 07, 2003 1:38 PM
To: Brockway,Connie
Subject: RE: amicus policy
98% of the Legal Affairs Committee Actions are in closed session and the City Attorney's Office keeps records. Of
the remaining actions which occur in Open Session, the Legal Affairs Committee does not have authority to make
final decisions and all matters are only considered for recommendation to the full City Council. The Committee's
recommendation is transmitted as part of the Request for Council Action to City Council. There is nothing
additional to report back to City Council other than the issues which are presented for Council action. This is
similar to the Inter-governmental Relations Committee. Your records should be sufficient to respond to any inquiry
as to the recommendations of the Legal Affairs Committee on open session items. Any requests for records
related to a closed session item should be referred to this office.
Thank you.
Jennifer
-----Original Message-----
From: Brockway,Connie
Sent: Monday,July 07,2003 12:46 PM
To: McGrath,Jennifer
Subject: amicus policy
Will the Legal Affairs Committee report back to Council on the action they took so that it will be a matter of City
Council record? Please let me know. If they do not report back as a receive and file or information only item it
will not be retrievable in the council action data base. If it is the city council's action it seems it should be
reported back. Please let me know so in the future I can respond to any inquiries I receive on the process.
Connie
1