public safety and crime prevention...presentation on nlc’s advocacy work to advance the...

Public Safety and Crime Prevention

2018 NLC City SummitLos Angeles Convention Center

Room: 515 B November 7, 2018

MEMORANDUM

TO: Public Safety and Crime Prevention (PSCP)

Federal Advocacy Committee Members FROM: The Honorable Sean Polster, Chair

Councilmember, Warrenton, Virginia RE: 2018 Policy Report On behalf of the Public Safety and Crime Prevention (PSCP) Federal Advocacy Committee, I am pleased to present the enclosed policy report for 2018. This report contains recommended policy amendments and resolutions of the PSCP Committee. Please carefully review these proposals in advance of the upcoming City Summit in Los Angeles, California. Members of the PSCP Federal Advocacy Committee, who attended the Little Rock, Arkansas meeting in June and participated on web/teleconference meeting in September, discussed and recommended changes to the PSCP Chapter of the National Municipal Policy (NMP) and resolutions that are included in this report. To maximize the time we have during our November meeting, PSCP Committee is asked to review the changes and consider a motion (en bloc) to codify the work of the Committee. The primary role of NLC’s policy and advocacy committees is to oversee the regular review and updating of the National Municipal Policy to ensure that it reflects the view of local officials on current and emerging federal policy issues. Adopted positions are used to guide NLC’s federal advocacy efforts, shape public policy debates, and communicate positions with the media and national opinion leaders. In addition to developing federal policy, the committees serve as advocates on behalf of our cities and towns, and take on increasing roles related to finding solutions to local challenges that cities can do on their own. The PSCP Federal Advocacy Committee has worked diligently to recommend policy changes and pursue initiatives under our Committee’s jurisdiction. If you have any questions about the proposals in this report, please feel free to contact me, any member of the Committee, or the NLC staff contact for our Committee. It has been an honor to serve as PSCP Committee Chair this year. We look forward to seeing you in Los Angeles.

- 1 -

Agenda: Public Safety and Crime Prevention Committee

Los Angeles Convention Center Room: 515 B Los Angeles, CA November 7, 2018

Wednesday, November 7

3:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS AND MEETING OVERVIEW

The Honorable Sean Polster, Chair Councilmember, City of Warrenton, Virginia

Introductions and explanation of expected outcomes from the meeting.

3:10 FEDERAL ADVOCACY UPDATE

Yucel (u‐jel) Ors, Federal Advocacy Program Director, Public Safety National League of Cities

Presentation on NLC’s advocacy work to advance the organization’s 2018 legislative priorities which include:

Federal investment in local infrastructure projects

Federal assistance to local governments to combat the opioid crises

Federal disaster mitigation and assistance

Tax reform 2.0

2019 Appropriations

Drones and autonomous vehicles

Federal preemption of local authority over 5G small cell deployments

Sanctuary cities

Getting Ready for the 2020 Census

- 2 -

3:20 REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NEW AND EXISTING RESOLUTIONS Expiring Resolutions

Urging the Federal Government to Clarify the De‐Obligation Process of Previously Approved Disaster‐Relief Funds

Renewing resolutions with no changes

In Support of Federal Efforts to Reduce Gun Violence and Prevent Prohibited Persons from Shipping, Transporting, Receiving, or Possessing Firearms or

In Support of Legislation to Reauthorize the Second Chance Act

In Support of Legislation to Reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)

In Opposition to Federal Efforts to Withhold Funding from Sanctuary Cities

Renewing resolution with changes

In Support of Federal Efforts to Combat the Epidemic of Heroine and Prescription Opioid Abuse

New resolutions

In support of federal efforts to ensure state and local governments have the authority to regulate the manufacturing, distribution and sale of medical and adult‐use cannabis

In Support of Federal Legislation to Incentivize States To Enact Extreme Risk Protection Order Laws and to Enact a Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Law to Reduce Firearm Related Suicides, Murder‐Suicides and Family Fire

In support of federal efforts to help local government reduce firefighter exposure to hazardous contaminants that may increase health risk

Resolutions to be incorporated into the permanent National Municipal Policy Manual

In Support of the Asset Forfeiture Program

In Support of Efforts to Improve policing in the 21st Century

- 3 -

3:40 REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO NATIONAL MUNICIPAL POLICY

Sec. 6.01.M. Improve Policing in the 21st Century

Sec. 6.01.N. Federal Asset Forfeiture Program

3:45 Smart Cities and Internet of Life Saving Technologies (IoLST) A healthy and thriving community is built upon the footing of safe neighborhoods; likewise, innovative and supportive technologies and their potential applications are endless. Enabling smart and safe communities will require new forms of cross‐sector and cross‐governmental collaboration and knowledge sharing to align needs and requirements, with innovation supporting the goal of shepherding progress through thoughtful change. With the ongoing nationwide deployment of the public safety broadband network (a/k/a FirstNet) there is a growing eco‐system of smart technologies and applications, also known as IoLST, to make communities safer. Although technology promises enormous benefit, it also introduces new challenges ranging from technical to ethical, legal, and social, including information safeguarding, data sharing and analysis, transparency and privacy. The goal of the discussion is to determine what should the role of NLC be in helping local leaders understand the risk and benefits of IoLST.

4:15 Discussion on Frist Responder PTSD The PSCP Committee members will have a discussion on how to help reduce the rate of stress‐related mental disorders such as acute stress disorder (ASD) and of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among first responders. The average rate of PTSD among first responders is estimated to be 16 percent, which is equivalent to the PTSD rates among combat veterans at 16.35 percent. The stress‐related mental disorders among first responders that lead result in attempted suicide among first responders is also estimated to be 6.6% as of 2016. The goal of the discussion will be determining if this is a national issue that requires federal resources to help reduce the rate of first responder suicides. What is the role of local, state and federal government? What is the role of NLC in helping communities deal with first responder PTSD?

- 4 -

4:50 LOOKING AHEAD TO 2019 Members will have an opportunity to recommend key issues they would like to see the PSCP Committee work on next year.

4:55 CONCLUDING REMARKS

5:00 p.m. ADJOURN

Next PSCP Committee Meeting: NLC Congressional City Conference

Washington, D.C.

Los Angeles, California March 10‐13, 2019

- 5 -

Procedures for the Adoption of National Municipal Policy and Resolutions City Summit

November 2018 The National Municipal Policy (NMP) is NLC’s comprehensive, standing statement of goals, principles, policies, and program objectives on federal policy issues directly affecting or of concern to cities and towns. The NMP serves as the basis for NLC’s advocacy efforts on behalf of the nation’s cities and towns. The policy is subject to annual modification by delegates from direct member cities and state municipal leagues during the City Summit. Because the opportunity for the membership to amend the NMP occurs only once each year, amendments to the policy typically do not endorse or oppose specific congressional bills, current presidential positions, or technical aspects of federal regulations. Instead, positions on such timely matters—which are subject to major changes during the annual legislative and administrative processes—are the subject of NLC resolutions that stand for one year, from their time of passage until the adjournment of the next City Summit. At the Congressional Cities Conference in March, the Federal Advocacy Committees set agendas for the year. At meeting(s) following the Conference, the committees develop recommendations for policy amendments and resolutions. Additionally, during the summer, all NLC direct member cities and state municipal leagues were invited to submit recommendations of policy amendments and resolutions by June 14, 2018 deadline. Prior to the City Summit, committee reports with policy amendments and proposed resolutions are made available to all Federal Advocacy Committee members and NLC members. These reports are also made available on the NLC website.

NLC’s Federal Advocacy Committees will each meet on Wednesday, November 7 at the City Summit. The Official Rules and Procedures presented here and in the NLC Bylaws shall govern the conduct of each committee meeting. In the event that procedural matters arise that are not addressed by the Official Rules or Bylaws, Robert’s Rules of Order Revised shall govern the conduct of the meeting. During the Federal Advocacy Committee meeting, action can be taken on policy amendments or resolutions submitted to NLC by the June 14 advance submission deadline, if the committee did not endorse those positions. Sponsors of these amendments or resolutions, or their representatives, can appear before the Federal Advocacy Committee on behalf of their proposed recommendations. The Federal Advocacy Committee can also hear additional proposals from the floor from committee members.

Federal Advocacy Committee Meetings: Wednesday, November 7

- 7 -

Individuals submitting resolutions or policy changes on‐site must bring 100 copies to the meeting and furnish them to the head table at the beginning of the meeting. An electronic copy of the proposal should also be provided, in advance if possible, to the NLC staff contact for the committee. (NLC staff should be notified in advance of this intention if at all possible.) Federal Advocacy Committee meetings are open to all conference participants. However, only committee members are eligible to vote, make formal motions, and debate items. Committee members will receive identification ribbons at the conference registration booth. Adoption of recommendations is by a majority vote of Federal Advocacy Committee members present and voting. Proxies are not permitted. Every reasonable effort will be made to ensure that the views of all committee members are heard.

Proposals approved by the Federal Advocacy Committees are forwarded to the NLC Resolutions Committee for consideration. The Resolutions Committee will meet during the City Summit on Thursday, November 8 at 10:15 a.m. The Federal Advocacy Committee chairs will report the recommendations of their respective committees to the Resolutions Committee members. In addition to these amendments and resolutions, the Resolutions Committee will consider any appeals by sponsors of policy amendments or resolutions that were received in NLC’s offices by the June 14 advance submission deadline and subsequently rejected during Federal Advocacy Committee debate (100 copies needed). Proposals from Resolutions Committee members or the Board of Directors also are eligible for consideration by the Resolutions Committee (100 copies needed). Only Resolutions Committee members or alternates appointed by state municipal leagues may participate and vote during the meeting. The only individuals who will be recognized to speak at the Resolutions Committee are members of the Resolutions Committee, board members, Federal Advocacy Committee chairs, and sponsors of policy recommendations being appealed. Adoption of recommendations is by majority vote of Resolutions Committee members present and voting. Proxies are not allowed. The Official Rules and Procedures presented here and in the NLC Bylaws shall govern the conduct of the Resolutions Committee meeting. In the event that procedural matters arise that are not addressed by the Official Rules or Bylaws, Robert’s Rules of Order Revised shall govern the conduct of the meeting.

Resolutions Committee Meeting: Thursday, November 8

Annual Business Meeting: Saturday, November 10

- 8 -

Resolutions Committee actions are referred to the Annual Business Meeting for consideration and adoption by the voting delegates. The report of the Resolutions Committee will include only recommended policy language amendments and resolutions. The Annual Business Meeting will be held during the City Summit on Saturday, November 10 at 2:45 p.m. To cast a vote at the Annual Business Meeting, all voting or alternate delegates must be registered with the Credentials Committee and must have official voting materials. Each direct member city has a certified voting delegate, or alternate, who is entitled to vote at the Annual Business Meeting. The delegate may cast a certain number of votes based upon the direct member city’s population as of the 2010 census; member cities may not split their votes. Each state municipal league is entitled to cast a total of 20 votes by its delegate or delegates, and those votes may be split and distributed at the discretion of each state municipal league. Voting delegates must be present to vote. Proxies are not permitted. After a brief presentation of the Resolutions Committee’s report, the Annual Business Meeting’s Presiding Officer will call for adoption of NMP amendments and resolutions as proposed by the Resolutions Committee. Amendments to each chapter will be considered in the order in which those chapters appear in the NMP. Motions from the floor to amend the Resolutions Committee’s recommendations require a majority vote for passage. Final adoption of amendments to the NMP requires a two‐thirds vote of voting delegates. Policy proposals not submitted by the Resolutions Committee may be presented by petition to the NLC Policy Office at the City Summit. Such petitions must be received by 10:00 a.m. on the day of the Annual Business Meeting, Saturday, November 10. Petitions must carry the text of the proposal and printed names, titles, and signatures of 10 certified voting delegates with their respective cities and states. The petition must receive a majority vote of the voting delegates to be accepted for floor consideration, and all proposals to amend or adopt the NMP and all separate resolutions require a two‐thirds vote for final approval. The Official Rules and Procedures presented here and in the NLC Bylaws shall govern the conduct of the Annual Business Meeting. In the event that procedural matters arise that are not addressed by the Official Rules or Bylaws, Robert’s Rules of Order Revised shall govern the conduct of the meeting.

For further information about this process prior to the City Summit or to contact the NLC staff for the committee, contact Avery Peters, 202.626.3020 or [email protected].

During the City Summit, please contact the Federal Advocacy staff at the Policy Office located in the Los Angeles Convention Center, Room 507.

- 9 -

POLICY AMENDMENTS

Only sections of the NLC National Municipal Policy (NMP) where modifications are proposed are reproduced in this report. The complete text of the current NMP, divided into seven policy chapters, can be found here or at http://www.nlc.org/influence‐federal‐policy/resources/national‐municipal‐policy. Please note:

Proposed new language is underlined;

Proposed language for deletion is struck out; and

Existing, unchanged language is shown as plain text POLICY

Section 6.01 Crime Prevention

- 10 -

Section 6.01 Crime Prevention 1 2 M. Improve Policing in the 21st Century (New Section) 3 4 NLC believes that trust between law enforcement agencies and the people they protect and serve 5 is essential to the stability of our communities, the integrity of our criminal justice system, and 6 the safe and effective delivery of policing services. Unfortunately, high-profile officer-involved 7 killings have exposed racially divisive issues in the relationships between local police and the 8 communities they protect and serve, especially in communities of color. 9 10 In December 18, 2014, President Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13684 establishing the 11 Task Force on 21st Century Policing to examine ways of fostering strong, collaborative 12 relationships between local law enforcement and the communities they protect and to make 13 recommendations to the President on ways policing practices can promote effective crime 14 reduction while building trust. The final report of the Task Force was delivered to the President 15 on March 2, 2015 that included a total of 63 recommendations, most of which were directed at 16 the approximately 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies spread throughout the 17 country. 18 19 NLC supports the report’s findings that encourage collaboration with community members, 20 especially in communities and neighborhoods disproportionately affected by crime, to develop 21 policies and strategies for deploying resources that aim to reduce crime by improving 22 relationships, increasing community engagement, and fostering cooperation. 23 24 NLC calls on Congress and the Administration to provide financial and technical assistance to 25 local governments to help implement the applicable recommendations of the Task Force on 21st 26 Century Policing and to assist municipalities with their efforts to make sure law enforcement 27 training provides the foundation to cultivate police officers as leaders in – and guardians of – 28 their communities by providing increased training in racial and implicit bias, intelligent restraint 29 and de-escalation tactics and the use of nonlethal force. 30 31 N. Federal Asset Forfeiture Program (New Section) 32 33 The criminal and civil asset forfeiture has long been an effective law enforcement tool to fight 34 against illegal profiteering and to deter crime. The federal asset forfeiture program, when it is 35 properly managed and regulated, redirects illegally gained property to be used by law 36 enforcement to combat criminal activity consistent with federal and state regulations. 37 When Congress passed the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 (CAFRA), P.L. 106-185, 38 it made significant reforms to the Department of Justice’s asset forfeiture program to ensure 39 property owners are afforded adequate due process before their property was forfeited. 40 41 NLC strongly supports the provision in the law that authorizes the Attorney General to transfer 42 or share seized assets with other federal, state, local, or foreign law enforcement agencies who 43 have participated in the investigation or proceedings that resulted in confiscation. The civil asset 44 forfeiture program provides millions in additional funding to support local law enforcement 45

- 11 -

agencies ability to continue to participate in federal task forces targeting criminal and gang 1 activity. 2 3 NLC is concerned that Congress’s continued scrutiny of the civil asset forfeiture’s peculiarities 4 in greater detail because of ongoing allegation of misconduct by local law enforcement agencies 5 it may once again consider legislation to change or limit the Department of Justice’s ability to 6 transfer property and funding to state and local law enforcement agencies through the civil asset 7 forfeiture program. NLC believes the reforms already implemented by the Department of Justice 8 address many of the concerns that have been raised regarding asset forfeiture and that any further 9 steps to reform the program should only be taken after careful consideration as to not further 10 weaken this valuable tool that aids state and local law enforcement in protecting our 11 communities. 12 13 NLC opposes federal legislation that would limit local law enforcements ability to participate in 14 the Federal civil asset forfeiture program. We strongly believe and future efforts to change or 15 severely limit local law enforcements ability to participate in the federal civil asset forfeiture 16 program should not give safe harbor to the cartels and professional criminals who engage in drug 17 trafficking, human trafficking and child pornography. NLC believes Congress should maintain 18 the method for reimbursement of state and local agencies that have committed resources 19 participate in joint Federal task forces, while also establishing appropriate requirements that 20 safeguard individual rights and remove financial incentives for potential misconduct. The 21 Department of Justice should also pursue sanctions against local law enforcement agencies that 22 habitually misuse the federal civil asset forfeiture program 23

- 12 -

POLICY RESOLUTIONS

NLC Resolutions are annual statements of position that last for one year from the date of their passage until the next City Summit. For current resolutions, the committee has the following options:

1. Renew the resolution for the coming year (with or without edits); 2. Incorporate the resolution into permanent policy; or 3. Let the resolution expire

The Committee discussion will be focused on making substantive changes to the resolutions. Committee members that have grammatical changes should notify staff of the error so that it can be corrected. The table below summarizes the actions recommended by the PSCP Federal Advocacy Committee.

Resolutions PSCP Federal Advocacy Committee

Recommendation

NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐33: In Support of Federal Efforts to Reduce Gun Violence and Prevent Prohibited Persons from Shipping, Transporting, Receiving, or Possessing Firearms or

At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the Committee approved a motion to renew the resolution without edits.

NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐34: In Support of Legislation to Reauthorize the Second Chance Act


NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐35: Urging the Federal Government to Clarify the De‐Obligation Process of Previously Approved Disaster‐Relief Funds

Staff recommendation to let the resolution expire. The Disaster Recovery Reform Act (DRRA) that was passed by Congress and signed in to law by the President in October of 2018 set stricter limitations on the ability of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to claw‐back previously approved funds distributed to local governments for disaster relief efforts.

NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐36: In Support of the Asset Forfeiture Program

At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the Committee approved a motion

- 13 -

POLICY RESOLUTIONS

to incorporate the resolution into permanent policy.

NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐37: In Support of Efforts to Improve policing in the 21st Century

At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the Committee approved a motion to incorporate the resolution into permanent policy.

NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐38: In Support of Federal Efforts to Combat the Epidemic of Heroine and Prescription Opioid Abuse

The PSCP Committee recommended renewing the resolution with additional changes during the September 2018 web/teleconference meeting.

NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐39: In Support of Legislation to Reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)


NLC RESOLUTION #2018‐40: In Opposition to Federal Efforts to Withhold Funding from Sanctuary Cities


PROPOSED PSCP RESOLUTION #1: In support of federal efforts to ensure state and local governments have the authority to regulate the manufacturing, distribution and sale of medical and adult‐use cannabis

The new resolution was reviewed by the PSCP Committee during the September web/teleconference meeting and no additional changes were recommended.

PROPOSED PSCP RESOLUTION #2: In Support of Federal Legislation to Incentivize States To Enact Extreme Risk Protection Order Laws and to Enact a Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Law to Reduce Firearm Related Suicides, Murder‐Suicides and Family Fire

The new resolution was reviewed by the PSCP Committee during the September web/teleconference meeting and additional changes were recommended.

PROPOSED PSCP RESOLUTION #3: In support of federal efforts to help local government reduce firefighter exposure to hazardous contaminants that may increase health risk

The new resolution was reviewed by the PSCP Committee during the September web/teleconference meeting and additional changes were recommended.

- 14 -

NLC RESOLUTION #2018-33 1 2

IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL EFFORTS TO REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE AND 3 PREVENT PROHIBITED PERSONS FROM SHIPPING, TRANSPORTING, 4

RECEIVING, OR POSSESSING FIREARMS OR AMMUNITION 5 6

[At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the PSCP Committee 7 approved a motion to renew the resolution without edits.] 8 9 WHEREAS, since January 2017, there have been 282 mass shootings involving four or more 10 victims in 37 states and 167 cities, killing 357 people and wounding 13341; and 11 12 WHEREAS, this year alone, there have been more than 48,863 gun-related incidents, killing 13 12,217 people and wounding 24,8772; and 14 15 WHEREAS, after several years of decline in the rate of gun violence, many cities around the 16 country are now reporting a significant rise in the level of gun violence, including mass 17 shootings; and 18 19 WHEREAS, persons with adjudicated mental illness3, violent criminals, drug dealers, gang 20 members, domestic abusers and now homegrown terrorists are some of the leading contributors 21 to the increase in gun violence; and 22 23 WHEREAS, many states and federal agencies are not currently complying with the data entry 24 requirements to the National Instant Background Check System to adequately prevent prohibited 25 persons from buying a firearm; and 26 27 WHEREAS, under current law, there are ten classes of persons prohibited from shipping, 28 transporting, receiving, or possessing firearms or ammunition: 29 30

1. persons convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term 31 exceeding one year; 32

2. fugitives from justice; 33 3. unlawful users or addicts of any controlled substance as defined in Section 102 of the 34

Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. §802)); 35 4. persons adjudicated as “mental defective” or committed to mental institutions4; 36

1 https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data 2 http://www.gunviolencearchive.org 3 Under 27 C.F.R. Section 478.11, the term “adjudicated as a mental defective” is defined to include a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence or a mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease, (1) is a danger to himself or others, or (2) lacks the mental capacity to manage his own affairs. The term also includes (1) a finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case and (2) those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. Sections 850a, 876(b). 4 Under 27 C.F.R. Section 478.11, the term “adjudicated as a mental defective” is defined to include a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence or a mental illness,

- 15 -

5. unauthorized immigrants and nonimmigrant visitors; 37 6. persons dishonorably discharged from the U.S. Armed Forces; 38 7. persons who have renounced their U.S. citizenship; 39 8. persons under court-order restraints related to harassing, stalking, or threatening an 40

intimate partner or child of such intimate partner; 41 9. persons convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence and 42 10. persons under indictment in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term 43

exceeding one year; and 44 45 WHEREAS, it is unlawful for any person to transfer, sell or otherwise dispose of a firearm or 46 ammunition to any of the prohibited persons enumerated above, if the transferor has reasonable 47 cause to believe that the transferee is prohibited from receiving those items; and 48 49 WHEREAS, federal firearms licensees (FFLs) are prohibited from transferring a long gun or 50 long gun ammunition to anyone less than 18 years of age, or a handgun or handgun ammunition 51 to anyone less than 21 years of age; and 52 53 WHEREAS, since 1994, it has been a federal offense for any unlicensed person to transfer a 54 handgun or handgun ammunition to anyone less than 18 years of age, and has also been illegal 55 for anyone under 18 years of age to possess a handgun or handgun ammunition (there are 56 exceptions to this law related to employment, ranching, farming, target practice, and hunting); 57 and 58 59 WHEREAS, under current law, FFLs are required to verify through the Federal Bureau of 60 Investigation (FBI) and the National Instant Background Check System (NICS) that non-licensed 61 persons are eligible to possess a firearm before subsequently transferring a firearm to them5, and 62 FFLs must also verify the identity of non-licensed transferees by inspecting a government-issued 63 photo identity document (e.g., a driver’s license); and 64 65 WHEREAS, since 1986, it has been a federal offense for non-licensees to knowingly transfer a 66 firearm or ammunition to any prohibited persons (18 U.S.C. §922(d)); and 67 68 WHEREAS, firearms or ammunition transfers initiated by FFLs through the Internet or at gun 69 shows are subject to the same federal laws as transfers initiated in any other manner;6 and 70 71 WHEREAS, under the permanent provisions of the Brady Act (December 1998 through 2014), 72 more than 271 million checks were completed, resulting in nearly 3 million denials, for a denial 73 rate of less than 1.1%;7 and 74

incompetency, condition, or disease, (1) is a danger to himself or others, or (2) lacks the mental capacity to manage his own affairs. The term also includes (1) a finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case and (2) those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. Sections 850a, 876(b). 5 FFLs currently do have discretion to transfer a firearm to an individual if a background check has not been completed by FBI through NICS within three business days. Many FFLs do not exercise this discretion and, like Walmart, the largest FFL in the US, have adopted a policy since 2002 to not transfer a firearm until they positively affirm an approved background check through FBI and NICS. 6 For further information, see CRS Report R42687, Internet Firearm and Ammunition Sales, by Vivian S. Chu. 7 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, available at

- 16 -

WHEREAS, federal law does not require background checks for intrastate (in-state) firearms 75 transfers between unlicensed persons; and 76 77 WHEREAS, almost all firearms used criminally in the United States were diverted at some 78 point from legal channels of commerce;8 and 79 80 WHEREAS, most prohibited persons obtain firearms and ammunition from the following types 81 of illegal gun trafficking activities: 82

straw purchasers or straw purchasing rings; 83 trafficking in firearms by corrupt federally licensed gun dealers; 84 trafficking in firearms by unlicensed dealers (i.e., persons who deal in firearms illegally 85

as the principal source of their livelihood); 86 trafficking in stolen firearms; and 87 trafficking of secondhand firearms acquired from unlicensed persons at gun shows, flea 88

markets, online and other private venues;9 and 89 90 WHEREAS, the illegal transfer of guns from licensed and unlicensed sellers is a significant 91 threat to public safety and law enforcement. 92 93 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the National League of Cities (NLC) calls on 94 Congress to pass legislation that would prohibit any person from knowingly transferring, 95 purchasing, or attempting or conspiring to purchase or transfer, any firearm or ammunition 96 from licensed or an unlicensed person on behalf of or at the request or demand of a prohibited 97 person, known or unknown; and 98 99 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, Congress should pass legislation that requires a fully 100 federally funded and completed background check within a reasonable time frame consistent 101 with state and local laws for all gun sales or transfers, and requires that all unlicensed or private 102 sellers use an FFL or participating law enforcement agency to facilitate a firearms background 103 check through NICS on the purchase or transfer of any firearm to anyone; and 104 105 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the legislation should provide increased funding and 106 assistance to state and local governments to upload standardized real-time data to NICS; and 107 108 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that legislation should provide funding to the Center for 109 Disease Control to conduct comprehensive research to identify the underlying causes that lead 110 to gun violence and mass shooting in communities; and 111 112 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that legislation should provide federal funding for education 113 and training in safe effective handling and secured storage of legal firearms; and 114 115 http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=13 8 Greg Ridgeway, Glenn L. Pierce, and Anthony A. Braga et al., Strategies for Disrupting Illegal Firearms Markets: A Case Study of Los Angeles, RAND Corporation, 2008, p. 1. 9 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws against Firearms Traffickers, June 2000, p. 11.

- 17 -

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED – NLC urges the Department of Justice to work closely with 116 State and local law enforcement to aggressively target and hold accountable licensed and 117 unlicensed individuals who break the law by knowingly selling or transferring firearms or 118 ammunition to prohibited persons, gun traffickers or straw purchasers; and 119 120 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NLC calls on the Congress and the Administration to 121 appoint a bipartisan commission by the end of 2018 that consists of federal, state, and local 122 officials, gun rights advocates, survivors of gun violence, law enforcement officials, and medical 123 and mental health providers to recommend legislation to reduce gun violence in the United 124 States. 125

- 18 -


IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION TO REAUTHORIZE THE SECOND CHANCE ACT 3 4

[At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the PSCP Committee 5 approved a motion to renew the resolution without edits.] 6 7 WHEREAS, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), about 6.74 million people were 8 under some form of adult correctional supervision in the U.S. at year end, 2015.1; and 9 10 WHEREAS, according to the most recent data from the Office of National Drug Control Policy, 11 over 9 million offenders cycle through local jails, while an additional 700,000 people are 12 released from state and federal prisons every year back into their local communities2; and 13 14 WHEREAS, according to the most recent study by BJS, “an estimated two-thirds (68 percent) of 15 the 405,000 prisoners released in 30 states were arrested for a new crime within three years of 16 release from prison, and three-quarters (77 percent) were arrested within five years. More than a 17 third (37 percent) of prisoners who were arrested within five years of release were arrested 18 within the first six months after release, with more than half (57 percent) arrested by the end of 19 the first year”3; and 20 21 WHEREAS, there are a number of barriers that prevent offenders from becoming productive 22 members in their communities, including drug and alcohol addiction, mental illness, 23 unemployment, and lack of housing; and 24 25 WHEREAS, “when offenders are released from incarceration, many of them have difficulty 26 finding a job and a place to live, and more than two-thirds return to a life of crime because of the 27 lack of opportunities”4; and 28 29 WHEREAS, without sufficient federal and state support and funding for local programs aimed 30 at transitioning offenders back into the community, cities will see a rise in crime levels which 31 will lead to an increase in recidivism rates; and 32 33 WHEREAS, city leaders across the country are looking at ways to support local programs that 34 help offenders reenter into society and one of the key challenges is to create a sustainable system 35 that will provide opportunities for offenders to find jobs and affordable housing5; and 36

1 “Correctional Populations in the United States, 2015” Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15_sum.pdf, accessed October 16, 2017. 2 “In-Custody Treatment and Offender Reentry,” White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/in-custody-treatment-and-reentry, accessed September 17, 2014. 3 “3 in 4 Former Prisoners in 30 States Arrested within 5 Years of Release,” Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics press release, http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rprts05p0510pr.cfm, April 22, 2014. 4 Council of State Governments Justice Center and Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, “Integrated Reentry and Employment Strategies: Reducing Recidivism and Promoting Job Readiness,” November 2012. 5 Katherine Sayre, “New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu Pushes Workforce Reentry for Returning Ex-offenders,” NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune, June 25, 2014.

- 19 -

WHEREAS, a study from the National Reentry Resource Center, created under the Second 37 Chance Act, shows that recidivism rates can be significantly reduced when states and local 38 communities commit to jailing only people who present a risk to public safety and to helping 39 newly released prisoners find drug treatment, psychiatric counseling and the other services they 40 need for a successful reentry back into their local communities. 41 42 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the National League of Cities urges Congress 43 to quickly pass the Second Chance Reauthorization Act that helps municipalities develop 44 successful and sustainable programs aimed at reducing recidivism and reintegrating offenders 45 back into the community.46

- 20 -


URGING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO CLARIFY THE DE-OBLIGATION 3 PROCESS OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DISASTER-RELIEF FUNDS 4

5 [Staff recommends letting the resolution expire because the Disaster Recovery Reform Act 6 (DRRA) that was passed by Congress and signed in to law by the President in October of 2018 7 set stricter limitations on the ability of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 8 to claw‐back previously approved funds distributed to local governments for disaster relief 9 efforts.] 10 11 WHEREAS, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (The 12 Stafford Act), establishes the statutory authority for most Federal disaster response activities 13 especially as they pertain to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and FEMA 14 programs; and 15 16 WHEREAS, the purpose of the Stafford Act is to provide continued and orderly assistance from 17 the Federal government to state and local governments to relieve hardship and damage that result 18 from disasters1; and 19 20 WHEREAS, the Stafford Act authorizes FEMA to obligate funds to states and local 21 governments to help recover from natural disasters that cause widespread damage to homes, 22 businesses and critical infrastructure; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the ability of state and local communities to recover successfully from natural 25 disaster events is due in large part to its partnership with FEMA and the financial assistance that 26 it provides under the Stafford Act; and 27 28 WHEREAS, it is through this partnership that local governments seek FEMA’s approval to 29 develop recovery projects that include authorized costs to be reimbursed by FEMA once the 30 project is completed; and 31 32 WHEREAS, FEMA is seeking to de-obligate previously-approved recovery funds from local 33 governments whenever the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General 34 determines that funds previously obligated now are deemed to be inconsistent with provisions of 35 the Stafford Act, regardless of whether the recipient has already spent the funds in accordance 36 with the grant’s requirements2; and 37 38 WHEREAS, FEMA’s de-obligation of previously approved recovery funds weakens the intent 39 of the Stafford Act; and 40 41

1 The Stafford Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 5121. 2 South Florida Water Management District v. FEMA, Case No. 13-80533-ClV (S.D.Fla. September 18, 2014)

- 21 -

WHEREAS, Congress enacted Section 705(c) of the Stafford Act, titled "Binding Nature of 42 Grant Requirements," to protect recipients of disaster assistance from these retroactive de-43 obligations.3 44 45 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the National League of Cities urges the 46 Federal government to amend the process whereby FEMA can declare that previously approved 47 funds distributed to local governments for disaster relief efforts are de-obligated so as to ensure 48 that the de-obligation process: 49 50

1. prohibits FEMA from retroactively disallowing funding of projects that were approved in 51 which costs were specified and reasonable and the project was completed as required 52 under Section 705(c) of the Stafford Act, 53

2. includes a reasonable time frame for municipalities to respond to information requests, 54 3. requires FEMA to make timely decisions on appeals filed by municipalities that face the 55

potential rescission of previously appropriated federal funds; and 56 4. prohibits FEMA from immediately rescinding previously obligated funds from the 57

grantee once the sub-grantee has stated its intent to appeal, in timely fashion, FEMA’s 58 decision.59

3 The Stafford Act, Section 705(c) provides "A State or local government shall not be liable for reimbursement or any other penalty of any payment made under this Act if (1) the payment was made pursuant to an approved agreement specifying the costs; (2) the costs were reasonable; and (3) the purpose of the grant was accomplished"

- 22 -


IN SUPPORT OF THE ASSET FORFEITURE PROGRAM 3 4

[At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the PSCP Committee 5 approved a motion to incorporate the resolution into permanent policy.] 6 7 WHEREAS, criminal and civil asset forfeiture has long been an effective law enforcement tool 8 to fight against illegal profiteering and to deter crime; and 9 10 WHEREAS, Congress and state legislatures have authorized its use for over 200 years; and 11 12 WHEREAS, every year, the federal asset forfeiture program redirects illegally gained property 13 to be used by law enforcement to combat criminal activity consistent with federal regulations; 14 and 15 16 WHEREAS, Congress created the Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Fund as part of the 17 Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, which receives confiscated cash and the proceeds 18 from forfeitures conducted under the laws enforced or administered by the Department of Justice 19 and the Department of Justice’s equitable share of forfeitures conducted by other state, federal, 20 or foreign law enforcement agencies; and 21 22 WHEREAS, Congress passed the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 (CAFRA), P.L. 23 106-185 that made significant reforms to the Department of Justice’s asset forfeiture program to 24 ensure property owners are afforded adequate due process before their property was forfeited; 25 and 26 27 WHEREAS, before confiscated cash or the proceeds from the sale of other confiscated property 28 is paid into the Fund, the Attorney General may authorize it to be transferred to or shared with 29 other federal, state, local, or foreign law enforcement agencies who have participated in the 30 investigation or proceedings that resulted in confiscation;1 and 31 32 WHEREAS, the Department of Justice anticipates transferring forfeited assets valued at $314.6 33 million dollars to state and local law enforcement agencies as compensation for their 34 contribution to joint enforcement efforts;2 and 35 36 WHEREAS, civil asset forfeiture program provides an additional $154.7 million in funding for 37 state and local agencies to continue to participate in Federal task forces in 2015 and 2016. 38 39

1 21 U.S.C. 881(e); 19 U.S.C. 1616a; 21 U.S.C. 853(i); 18 U.S.C. 981(d),(e); 18 U.S.C. 982(b); 18 U.S.C. 1963(g). 2 28 U.S.C. 524(c). The Department of Justice’s annual forfeiture fund report anticipated FY2015 expenditures.

- 23 -

WHEREAS, Congress continues to scrutinize the civil asset forfeiture’s eccentricities in greater 40 detail because of ongoing allegation of misconduct by local law enforcement agencies; and 41 42 WHEREAS, Congress is once again considering legislation to change or limit the Department of 43 Justice’s ability to transfer property and funding to state and local law enforcement agencies 44 through the civil asset forfeiture program; and 45 46 WHEREAS, the reforms already implemented by the Department of Justice address many of the 47 concerns that have been raised regarding asset forfeiture and that any further steps to reform the 48 program should only be taken after careful consideration as to not further weaken this valuable 49 tool that aids state and local law enforcement in protecting our communities; and 50 51 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the National League of Cities opposes 52 legislation that would limit local law enforcements ability to participate in the Federal civil asset 53 forfeiture program; and 54 55 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, efforts to change or severely limit local law enforcements 56 ability to participate in the federal civil asset forfeiture program should not give safe harbor to 57 the cartels and professional criminals who engage in drug trafficking, human trafficking and 58 child pornography; and 59 60 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, Congress should maintain the method for reimbursement of 61 state and local agencies that have committed resources participate in joint Federal task forces, 62 while also establishing appropriate requirements that safeguard individual rights and remove 63 financial incentives for potential misconduct. 64 65 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, NLC encourages the Department of Justice to pursue 66 sanctions against local law enforcement agencies that habitually misuse the federal civil asset 67 forfeiture program. 68

- 24 -


IN SUPPORT OF EFFORTS TO IMPROVE POLICING IN THE 21ST CENTURY 3 4

[At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the Committee 5 approved a motion to incorporate the resolution into permanent policy.] 6 7 WHEREAS, trust between law enforcement agencies and the people they protect and serve is 8 essential to the stability of our communities, the integrity of our criminal justice system, and the 9 safe and effective delivery of policing services; and 10 11 WHEREAS, recent events over the past couple years have exposed issues and opportunities in 12 the relationships between local police and the communities they protect and serve; and 13 14 WHEREAS, December 18, 2014, President Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13684 15 establishing the Task Force on 21st Century Policing to examine ways of fostering strong, 16 collaborative relationships between local law enforcement and the communities they protect and 17 to make recommendations to the President on ways policing practices can promote effective 18 crime reduction while building trust; and 19 20 WHEREAS, the final report of the Task Force was delivered to the President on March 2, 2015 21 that included a total of 63 recommendations, most of which were directed at the approximately 22 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies spread throughout the country; and 23 24 WHEREAS, local elected officials play a large role in working with law enforcement officers, 25 community leaders, faith-based institutions, youth groups and federal and state partners to 26 implement many of the recommendations in the report; and 27 28 WHEREAS, implementing the recommendations of the report will have a considerable impact 29 on local government budgets and programs; and 30 31 WHEREAS, the report encourages collaboration with community members, especially in 32 communities and neighborhoods disproportionately affected by crime, to develop policies and 33 strategies for deploying resources that aim to reduce crime by improving relationships, 34 increasing community engagement, and fostering cooperation; and 35 36 WHEREAS, the report also calls on local governments to recognize the voices of youth in 37 community decision making, facilitate youth participation in research and problem solving. 38 39 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the National League of Cities (NLC) urges the 40 Department of Justice to work closely with local leaders to help implement the relevant 41 recommendations that are most needed in their communities; and 42 43

- 25 -

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, NLC calls on Congress and the Administration to provide 44 financial and technical assistance to local governments to help implement the applicable 45 recommendations of the Task Force on 21st Century Policing; and 46 47 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, NLC calls on the Federal Government to assist municipalities 48 with their efforts to make sure law enforcement training provides the foundation to cultivate 49 police officers as leaders in – and guardians of – their communities by providing increased 50 training in racial and implicit bias, de-escalation tactics and the use of nonlethal force.51

- 26 -

NLC RESOLUTION 2018-38 1 2

IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL EFFORTS TO COMBAT THE EPIDEMIC OF HEROIN 3 AND PRESCRIPTION OPIOID ABUSE 4

5 [The PSCP Committee recommended renewing the resolution with additional changes 6 during the September 2018 web/teleconference meeting.] 7 8 WHEREAS, cities throughout the nation – both urban and rural – are dealing with the tragic 9 effects of the epidemic of heroin and prescription opioid abuse; and 10 11 WHEREAS, heroin and opioid addiction is an epidemic ravaging urban, suburban, and rural 12 communities in our country;1 and 13 14 WHEREAS, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, opioids (including 15 prescription opioids, heroin, and fentanyl) killed more than 42,000 people in 20162; and 16 17 WHEREAS, cities are supplying their law enforcement, fire and emergency medical personnel 18 with naloxone to reverse heroin and opioid overdose, which rapidly restores normal respiration 19 to a person who has stopped breathing as a result of overdose; and 20 21 WHEREAS, local governments have been aggressively developing policies and programs to 22 address substance abuse disorders in their communities but many lack the necessary resources to 23 mount a comprehensive response to the opioid and heroin epidemic; and 24 25 WHEREAS, efforts to reduce the number of opioid and heroin overdoses in our cities require a 26 strong partnership between local, state and federal health and law enforcement programs; and 27 28 WHEREAS, Congress passed the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA) of 2016 29 (Public Law No: 114-198) and the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255), which 30 authorizes additional funding for local opioid abuse prevention and education efforts, expands 31 the availability of naloxone to local law enforcement, fire and emergency medical personnel, and 32 supports local prescription opioid and heroin treatment and intervention programs; and 33 34 WHEREAS, in FY 2017 and FY 2018 the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 35 awarded more than $1 billion in grants – authorized by the CARA and the Cures Act – to states 36 and territories to help combat the opioid epidemic by funding local programs for prevention and 37 treatment to those affected; and 38 39 WHEREAS, lack of clarity from Congress and the Administration on how States should use the 40 money has left millions of dollars in federal funding unspent; and 41 42

1 Cicero, T., Ellis, M., Surratt, H, Kurtz, S. The Changing Face of Heroin Use in the United States: A Retrospective Analysis of the Past 50 Years, July, 2014. 2 https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/index.html

- 27 -

WHEREAS, local governments are best positioned to quickly put the unspent funding and any 43 additional funding that Congress provides for opioid abuse prevention and treatment programs to 44 immediate use; 45 46 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the National League of Cities (NLC) urges 47 Congress to require States to submit a distribution plan on how they will use unspent FY 2017 48 and 2018 Cures and CARA funding by distributing to local programs for prevention and 49 treatment of substance abuse disorders by the end of the first quarter of FY 20182019; and 50 51 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, NLC calls on Congress to include statutory language in future 52 substance abuse disorder prevention, intervention, treatment and recovery funding that would 53 require federal agencies to allocate at least 20 percent of the appropriated funding towards 54 competitive grant funding to local government efforts or require States that receive a federal 55 block grant for substance use prevention, intervention, treatment and recovery services to pass 56 through 80 percent of the funding within 60 days of receiving the award to local governments 57 and programs;. and 58 59 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that once a State receives a federal block grant for substance 60 abuse disorder prevention, intervention, treatment and recovery it should be required to inform 61 all local governments in the State on how the State intends to distribute the funding to support 62 local programs. 63

- 28 -


IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION TO REAUTHORIZE THE NATIONAL FLOOD 3 INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) 4

5 [At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the PSCP Committee 6 approved a motion to renew the resolution without edits.] 7 8 WHEREAS, Congress created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in 1968 to make 9 affordable flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in exchange 10 for using Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) generated and specified Flood 11 Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) for floodplain management by a participating community; and 12 13 WHEREAS, the Flood Disaster Act of 1973 requires the purchase of flood insurance as a 14 condition of receiving any form of federal or federal-related financial assistance for acquisition 15 or construction purposes with respect to the insurance buildings; and 16 17 WHEREAS, the NFIP provides affordable flood insurance to property owners by encouraging 18 local governments to adopt and enforce floodplain and water management regulations, best 19 practices and techniques; and 20 21 WHEREAS, these mitigation efforts reduce and prevent flooding on new and improved 22 structures, thereby saving lives and reducing injuries, reducing economic losses, maintaining and 23 protecting critical infrastructure, and reducing the liability borne by local governments and 24 elected officials; and 25 26 WHEREAS, in July 2012, the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (BW-12) 27 was enacted (PL 112-141) to extend the authorization of the NFIP through September 30, 2017; 28 and 29 30 WHEREAS, the NFIP collected more than $1.2 billion in 2015 and paid out more than $791 31 million in loses to 20,208 homeowners and businesses1; and 32 33 WHEREAS, as of June 30, 2016, there were 5,085,771 homeowners and businesses that were 34 issued a flood insurance policy through the NFIP2; and 35 36 WHEREAS, there is still no viable private market for homeowners and businesses to acquire 37 sufficient flood insurance coverage; and 38 39 WHEREAS, it is incumbent upon all of us to have a long-term, sustainable and viable NFIP 40 with rates that are affordable; and 41

1 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2016, May 11). National Flood Insurance Program: Statistics by Calendar Year. Retrieved from Federal Emergency Management Agency: https://www.fema.gov/statistics-calendar-year 2 FEMA (2016, June 30)

- 29 -

WHEREAS, accurate mapping is fundamental for local governments to assess and communicate 42 risk to their communities and homeowners; and 43 44 WHEREAS, the current mapping process often results in local governments having to fight 45 inaccurate maps that do not take into account locally built flood protection features and 46 communities building off of outdated mapping, which results in artificially inflated risk. Further, 47 many areas of the country are not mapped or mapped accurately, which results in communities 48 who are at risk of flooding unaware of the risk; and 49 50 WHEREAS, unless Congress reauthorizes the NFIP by September 30, 2017, millions of home-51 owners and businesses will lose their flood insurance coverage and could default on their loans. 52 53 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the National League of Cities (NLC) urges 54 Congress to reauthorize the NFIP and to keep flood insurance rates affordable for primary, non-55 primary and business properties while balancing the fiscal solvency of the program; and 56 57 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that NLC urges the federal government to work with state and 58 local governments, the insurance industry, and other stakeholders to develop an incentive-based 59 disaster insurance and mitigation system that would encourage property owners to retrofit 60 existing structures to reduce future losses from natural disasters; and 61 62 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that NLC urges the federal government to encourage lending 63 institutions to incorporate mitigation provisions as conditions for loans; and 64 65 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in order for local governments to help their communities 66 and homeowners to adequately prepare for risk, Congress should provide additional resources to 67 FEMA to utilize the best technology and methods available to improve the mapping process, 68 including seeking the input from local government officials prior to approving any flood map 69 that could impact local zoning rules.70

- 30 -


IN OPPOSITION TO FEDERAL EFFORTS TO WITHHOLD FUNDING FROM 3 SANCTUARY CITIES 4

5 [At the NLC Leadership Summit meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, the PSCP Committee 6 approved a motion to renew the resolution without edits.] 7 8 WHEREAS, Since the inception of the United States of America, lawful immigrants and 9 refugees have played a vital role in the civic, economic and social life of cities; and 10 11 WHEREAS, cities strive to make their communities safe by rejecting racial and religious 12 profiling; and 13 14 WHEREAS, cities expect local law enforcement officers to respond to the needs of their 15 community and to respect, protect and serve all residents, documented and undocumented, to 16 ensure safety for all people they serve; and 17 18 WHEREAS, local governments address issues associated with federal immigration laws in a 19 variety of ways that best meet the needs of all their residents; and 20 21 WHEREAS, some cities choose not to dedicate municipal resources to enforce federal 22 immigration laws against undocumented immigrants who do not violate state or local laws; and 23 24 WHEREAS, there is no federal statute that clearly defines a sanctuary city; and 25 26 WHEREAS, some cities are wrongfully characterized as safe havens for undocumented 27 immigrants who violate state and local laws; and 28 29 WHEREAS, the power to enforce federal immigration laws remains exclusively a federal 30 power; and 31 32 WHEREAS, Congress is considering legislation that would impose sanctions on local 33 governments if the local government adopts a statute, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts 34 information sharing about an individual’s immigration status or compliance when a detainer 35 request is issued by the Department of Homeland Security; and 36 37 WHEREAS, such detainer requests can result in a potentially unconstitutional violation of the 38 Fourth Amendment by mandating local law enforcement to maintain custody of a person for an 39 additional 48 hours or longer without criminal charges; and 40 41 WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that the powers not delegated 42 to the United States are reserved to the states, including deployment of local law enforcement; 43 and 44 45

- 31 -

WHEREAS, the Supreme Court in Galarza v. Szalczyk, held that “[u]nder the Tenth 46 Amendment, immigration officials may not order state and local officials to imprison suspected 47 aliens subject to removal at the request of the federal government.” (745 F.3d 634 (2014).) 48 49 WHEREAS, in states like Texas, according to reports filed with the Texas Commission on Jail 50 Standards, the total number of inmates with Immigration Detainers in local jails was 5,031 for 51 the month of August 2017. The policy of detaining undocumented immigrants in Texas county 52 jails for the month of August cost $6.5 million, diverting local resources away from creating 53 economically stable, healthy and safe neighborhoods; and 54 55 WHEREAS, the reasons why cities are implementing policies to limit cooperation with federal 56 immigration enforcement efforts include the fiscal concerns related to the costs of enforcing 57 immigration laws, logistical concerns related to training, and the potential for civil liability; and 58 59 WHEREAS, cities work closely with their city attorneys to consider various approaches to 60 writing policies that declare an acceptance of diversity and inclusion while complying with 61 established state and federal law; and 62 63 WHEREAS, while many cities have policies that limit law enforcement officers’ ability to 64 investigate, detain, or enforce laws based on immigration status, they also require the officers to 65 cooperate with federal officials. 66 67 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the National League of Cities opposes federal 68 legislation that would impose harmful sanctions on local governments that have in affect a 69 statute, ordinance, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts compliance when a detainer 70 request or administrative warrant is issued by the Department of Homeland Security; and 71 72 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Congress should ensure that the Department of Homeland 73 Security’s detainer requests and administrative warrant comply with of the U.S. Constitution’s 74 Fourth and Tenth Amendments; and 75 76 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Congress should provide additional resources and 77 funding to the Department of Homeland Security to meet the statutory requirements to enforce 78 our Nation’s immigration laws and not force local governments to take on the financial 79 responsibilities and duties of federal immigration enforcement agents. 80

- 32 -

PROPOSED PSCP RESOLUTION #1 1 2

IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL EFFORTS TO ENSURE STATE AND LOCAL 3 GOVERNMENTS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE THE 4

MANUFACTURING, DISTRIBUTION AND SALE OF MEDICAL AND ADULT-5 USE CANNABIS 6

7 [The resolution was reviewed by the PSCP Committee during the September 2018 8 web/teleconference meeting and no additional changes were recommended.] 9 10 WHEREAS, in 1970, President Nixon signed the Controlled Substance Act (CSA) and listed 11 “marijuana (cannabis)” in the most restrictive category, Schedule I, which was designated for 12 substances that “have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted 13 safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse;" and 14 15 WHEREAS, the listing of cannabis as a Schedule I substance was supposed to be temporary 16 pending a federal review by the newly formed National Commission on Marihuana and Drug 17 Policy (more commonly known as the Shafer Commission)1; and 18 19 WHEREAS, despite the Shafer Commission's 1972 report concluded that "neither the 20 marihuana user nor the drug itself can be said to constitute a danger to public safety," and 21 recommended that cannabis possession for personal use no longer be considered a criminal 22 offense2, cannabis remains as a Schedule I substance today; and 23 24 WHEREAS, throughout the 1980s, because cannabis was listed as a Schedule I substance, 25 federal and state criminal penalties for cannabis became stricter and mandatory-minimum 26 sentences were established3; and 27 28 WHEREAS, the annual number of cannabis arrests in the U.S. increased from 327,000 in 1990 29 to more than 697,000 in 20024; and 30 31 WHEREAS, since 2002, public support for legalizing cannabis has increased from 34% to 64% 32 in 20175; and 33 34 WHEREAS, since 1996, 30 states and the District of Columbia have legalized the medical use 35 of cannabis and since 2012, nine states and the District of Columbia have also legalized the 36 adult-use of cannabis; and 37 38

1 Amy Nordrum, "Why Is Marijuana A Schedule I Drug?," ibtimes.com, Feb. 19, 2015 2 National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse & Raymond P. Shafer, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, 1972 3 Eric Schlosser, "Marijuana and the Law," The Atlantic, Sep. 1994 4 Ryan S. King and Marc Mauer, "The War on Marijuana: The Transformation of the War on Drugs in the 1990s," sentencingproject.com, May 2005 5 Justin McCarthy, “Record-High Support for Legalizing Marijuana Use in U.S.,” Gallup, October 2017

- 33 -

WHEREAS, the cannabis industry in the United States could exceed $24 billion in revenue by 39 20256 and for every $1.00 spent in the marijuana industry, between $2.13 and $2.40 in economic 40 activity is generated7; and 41 42 WHEREAS, the millions of dollars in tax revenues that have been collected in states that have 43 legalized medical and adult-use cannabis provide funding to local police, drug treatment and 44 mental health centers, housing programs, and school program8; and 45 46 WHEREAS, more than 122,814 jobs have been created in states that have legalized the medical 47 and adult-use of cannabis9; and 48 49 WHEREAS, more than half of US adults, over 128 million people, have tried cannabis, despite 50 it being an illegal drug under federal law10; and 51 52 WHEREAS, despite the increased number of states that have legalized cannabis, a study from 53 the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) found that marijuana use among kids ages 12 to 17 54 decreased by 17%, from 15.8% in 2002 to 13.1% in 2014 including a nearly 12% drop in 55 marijuana use just two years after adult use was legalized in Colorado, according to the National 56 Survey on Drug Use and Health11; and 57 58 WHEREAS, the rising concerns about the conflict between federal and state laws on cannabis 59 use led to a 2013 memo by Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole stated “that so long as states 60 had good regulations, then the federal government would hold off on challenging marijuana 61 legalization”12; and 62 63 WHEREAS, the roll back of Department of Justice’s 2013 Cole memo in 2018 by Attorney 64 General Jeff Sessions is raising new questions about whether the federal government will crack 65 down on states that legalized medical and adult-use of cannabis by instructing federal 66 prosecutors to determine for themselves when to prosecute marijuana activities; and 67 68 WHEREAS, the threat of increased federal enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act has 69 resulted in uncertainty of states and local governments ability to regulate the manufacturing, 70 distribution and retail sale of cannabis for the safety and health of its residents; and 71 72 WHEREAS, On June 7, 2018, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Senator Cory Gardner (R-73 CO) introduced the Strengthening the Tenth Amendment Through Entrusting States (STATES) 74

6 Alicia Wallace, "Report: America's Marijuana Industry Headed for $24 Billion by 2025," thecannabist.co, Feb. 22, 2017 7 Troy Antonuci, "The Economics of Legalization," Daily Marijuana Observer, Apr. 6, 2017 8 Josh Hamilton, "The Economic and Social Benefits of Taxing Marijuana," medium.com, Sep. 26, 2017 9 Bruce Barcott and Gage Peake, "Part 2, How Many Jobs Depend on Legal Cannabis?," leafly.com, Jan. 5, 2017 10 MaristPoll, "Yahoo News/Marist Poll: Weed & The American Family," marist.edu, Apr. 17, 2017 11 Alejandro Azofeifa, et al., "National Estimates of Marijuana Use and Related Indicators - National Survey on Drug Use and Health, United States, 2002–2014," cdc.gov, Sep. 2, 2016 12 Department of Justice, "Justice Department Announces Update to Marijuana Enforcement Policy," justice.gov, Aug. 29, 2013

- 34 -

Act, which would ensure that each State has the right to determine for itself the best approach to 75 marijuana within its borders; and 76 77 WHEREAS, rescheduling of cannabis would allow greater federal, state and local regulation of 78 the industry to ensure the cannabis people are buying is not covered with mold, fungus, 79 pesticides, or other harmful substances13; and 80 81 WHEREAS, rescheduling of cannabis would allow the federal, state and local governments to 82 set rules and regulations that would restrict driving under the influence, set age restrictions on 83 buyers and regulate the entire supply chain of cannabis, including growers, distributors, retailers, 84 and testing laboratories14; and 85 86 WHEREAS, rescheduling of cannabis should also allow local governments to establish zoning 87 restrictions on the manufacturing, distribution and retail sales of cannabis. 88 89 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the National League of Cities (NLC) calls on 90 the White House, U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to 91 reschedule cannabis by removing it from the list of Schedule I substances under the CSA; and 92 93 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, NLC urges Congress to pass legislation that would ensure 94 states and local governments have the ability to establish laws and regulations on the 95 manufacturing, distribution, and sale of medical and adult-use cannabis within the state; and 96 97 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, calls on the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, 98 Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Drug Enforcement Administration, and the United 99 States Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration to establish 100 federal regulations for the manufacturing, distribution and sale of legal medical and adult-use 101 cannabis.102

13 American Public Health Association (APHA), "Regulating Commercially Legalized Marijuana as a Public Health Priority," Nov. 18, 2014 14 Bureau of Cannabis Control, "Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation," bcc.ca.gov

- 35 -


In Support of Federal Legislation to Incentivize States To Enact Extreme Risk Protection 3 Order Laws and to Enact a Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Law to Reduce 4

Firearm Related Suicides, Murder-Suicides and Family Fire 5 6

[The resolution was reviewed by the PSCP Committee during the September 7 web/teleconference meeting and additional changes were recommended.] 8 9 WHEREAS, a majority of the discussion in Congress regarding gun violence prevention 10 overlooks the leading causes of firearm related deaths and injuries in the United States – suicide, 11 murder-suicide and family fire; and 12 13 WHEREAS, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Annual Fetal Injury 14 Report, 62 percent (218,735) of the firearm related deaths from 2006 to 2016 were due to a 15 person using a firearm to commit suicide1; and 16 17 WHEREAS, in 2015, more than 32 percent of homicide victims were killed by a family member 18 or someone they knew (acquaintance, neighbor, friend, boyfriend, etc.) and more than 71 percent 19 of the homicides for which the Federal Bureau of Investigations received weapons data in 2015 20 involved the use of firearms2; and 21 22 WHEREAS, more than 65 percent of the murder-suicides involve an intimate partner and nine 23 out of ten use a firearm3; and 24 25 WHEREAS, if a firearm is present in the home when a domestic violence incident takes place, 26 the risk of homicide increases by 500 percent4; and 27 28 WHEREAS, the lifetime medical and work-loss costs for suicide in 2013 was estimated to be 29 above $50 billion5 and the total societal cost of suicides in 2013 was estimated to exceed more 30 than $93 billion; and 31 32 WHEREAS, we lose twenty-two military veterans a day to suicide and 2/3’s of such suicides are 33 gun suicides, and 34 35 WHEREAS, more than 50% of all suicides in the United States are gun suicides, and 36 37

1 United States Suicide & Homicide Firearm Deaths and Rates, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Fatal Injury Reports, National, Regional and State, 1999 – 2016 2 Federal Bureau of Investigations Uniform Crime Report (UCR) – Expanded Homicide Data, 2015. (Note: 2016 and 2017 UCR data did not delineate victim’s relationship.) 3 Violence Policy Center, American Roulette: Murder-Suicide in the United States, Sixth Edition, 2018, http://vpc.org/studies/amroul2018.pdf 4 National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, “Guns and Domestic Violence,” https://ncadv.org/assets /2497/guns_and_dv.pdf 5 Florence C, Simon T, Haegerich T, Luo F, Zhou C. Estimated lifetime medical and work-loss costs of fatal injuries-United States, 2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64(38):1074-1077.

- 36 -

WHEREAS, most people who survive a suicide attempt never try again, only 10% of those who 38 attempt suicide with a gun survive, and less than 50% of those who attempt suicide by any other 39 means die, and 40 41 WHEREAS, suicide, murder-suicide and family fire are often associated with known risk 42 factors that family members, cohabitants, law enforcement and other qualified professionals can 43 use to alert public safety and health officials through petitioning the courts when an individual is 44 in crisis and could use a firearm to harm themselves or others. Such risk factors may include: 45 46

a history of depression, suicidal ideations, violent outbursts or threats of violence, 47 and exhibiting other such risky or threatening behaviors such as hopelessness, 48 substance abuse, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and other such health conditions, 49 previous suicide attempts, violence victimization and perpetration, and genetic and 50 biological determinants. 51

high conflict or violent relationships, sense of isolation and lack of social support, 52 family/ loved one’s history of suicide, financial and work stress 53

inadequate community connectedness, barriers to health care (e.g., lack of access to 54 providers and medications); and 55 56

WHEREAS, Extreme Risk Protection Orders, also called Gun Violence Restraining Orders, 57 have been enacted in several states since first being implemented in Connecticut in 1999 (for law 58 enforcement only) and in California in 2014 (for family and law enforcement), and have been 59 found to greatly reduce the incidence of gun suicide and other gun related violence, and 60 61 WHEREAS, permitting law enforcement, immediate family members, co-habitants and other 62 qualified professionals to petition a court to allow law enforcement to temporarily remove 63 firearms, and temporarily prohibit the purchase or possession of firearms from an individual that 64 is determined by the court to be a danger to themselves or others has proven to dramatically 65 reduce the rate of gun violence where enacted and could greatly reduce gun violence in the 66 United States, saving federal, state and local governments billions of dollars while saving lives. 67 68 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the National League of Cities urges Congress to 69 pass legislation that would allow certain immediate family members, co-habitants, law 70 enforcement and other qualified professionals to petition a court to temporarily prohibit an 71 individual from purchasing or possessing a firearm and direct local law enforcement to 72 temporarily confiscate firearms from those same individuals who the court finds are at risk of 73 committing suicide, murder-suicide, family fire or other gun related violence as a danger to 74 themselves or to others; and 75 76 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the legislation should also further prevent these individuals 77 from purchasing or possessing firearms by requiring that their names be entered into the National 78 Instant Criminal Background Check System until such time it has been determined by the court 79 that they no longer pose a threat to themselves or to others; and 80 81

- 37 -

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the legislation must ensure that any effort to confiscate 82 firearms from individuals who may pose a threat to themselves or others requires local law 83 enforcement to follow federal and state notification and due process protections. 84 85 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, an individual that makes a malicious claim against another 86 person to have their firearms removed and prohibit them from purchase or possession of firearms 87 should be subject to appropriate legal action by the state and local governments.88

- 38 -


IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL EFFORTS TO HELP LOCAL GOVERNMENT REDUCE 3 FIREFIGHTER EXPOSURE TO HAZARDOUS CONTAMINANTS THAT MAY 4

INCREASE HEALTH RISK 5 6

[The resolution was reviewed by the PSCP Committee during the September 7 web/teleconference meeting and additional changes were recommended.] 8 9 WHEREAS, the National League of Cities (NLC) conducted a study in 2009 that found there is 10 a lack of substantive evidence that was available at the time to confirm or deny linkages between 11 firefighting and an elevated incidence of cancer; and 12 13 WHEREAS, the NLC report, however, concluded the cancer research studies did provide solid 14 groundwork from which future studies can be developed and improved and recommend 15 collaborative efforts by government, scientists, firefighters, municipalities, national associations, 16 and others to undertake additional research, establish a firefighter cancer database, and seek 17 more federal funding for research; and 18 19 WHEREAS, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has recently conducted extensive 20 research recently on the risk of cancer to firefighters, and 21 22 WHEREAS, NFPA studies have concluded that firefighters are exposed to highly toxic 23 substances (including a variety of carcinogens) on the fireground; and 24 25 WHEREAS, it is presumed health risk associated with fire ground exposures is related to 26 protection/hygiene practices and persistent harmful contamination found in firefighter 27 equipment, apparatus carrying that equipment, and stations where the equipment resides; and 28 29 WHEREAS, firefighter exposure to dirty, soiled, and contaminated personal protective 30 equipment (PPE) is an increasing concern for long-term firefighter health; and 31 32 WHEREAS, there is still a strong need exists to determine the broad contamination hazards that 33 exist throughout the fire service, and gaps in how contamination is addressed similarly need to be 34 identified; and 35 36 WHEREAS, a new law that requires the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to 37 develop and maintain a registry to collect data on firefighter cancer was signed on July 9, 2018 38 by President Trump. 39 40 WHEREAS, the Firefighter Cancer Registry Act calls for the collection of voluntary data 41 including whether a firefighter is a career professional or volunteer, years on the job, the number 42 of calls responded to, and incident type so that researchers can better understand the impact of 43 smoke inhalation and other job-related dangers that may lead to cancer. 44 45

- 39 -

WHEREAS, it is important to the health of firefighters to properly clean PPE following a fire to 46 prevent the transfer of carcinogens, particulates and biohazards; and 47 48 WHEREAS, the high cost of realizing a comprehensive PPE cleaning program may limit some 49 municipal fire departments, especially in small cities and towns with volunteer fire services, 50 from implementing standard PPE cleaning procedures; and 51 52 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the National League of Cities urges Congress to 53 authorize additional funding as a part of the Assistance to Firefighters Grants to support local 54 governments in implementing comprehensive municipal fire firefighter PPE cleaning program; 55 and 56 57 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, NLC calls on Congress to provide sufficient funding to ensure 58 national firefighter registry is properly maintained and the data is validated to provide an 59 accurate account of firefighter cancer rates and causes; and 60 61 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the National League of Cities (NLC) should consider 62 updating the “Assessing the State Firefighter Cancer Presumption Laws and Current Cancer 63 Firefighter Cancer Research” that it conducted in 2009 to determine what linkages there are 64 between firefighting and an elevated incidence of cancer. 65

- 40 -

2018 Public Safety and Crime Prevention (PSCP) Committee Roster

Chair

Sean Polster

Councilmember Warren, Virginia

Vice Chair

Harry Gordon

Mayor Stephens, Arkansas

Vice Chair

Stephanie Gordon Councilmember

East Point, Georgia

Alabama James Reasor, City Councilman, Midfield Veronica Hudson, City councilmember, Saraland Mike Jones, President‐City Council, Helena Cleophus King, City Council, Bessemer

Arizona Mark Freeman, Councilmember, Mesa Lauren Tolmachoff, Council Member, Glendale

California Alan Wapner, Mayor pro Tem, Ontario Mitchell Englander, Los Angeles City Councilmember, Los Angeles Marty Simonoff, Council Member, Brea

Colorado

- 41 -

Ray Martinez, Councilman, Fort Collins Marsha Berzins, City Council, Aurora

Connecticut Eneida Martinez, City Council, Bridgeport Michelle A. Lyons, City Council Member, Bridgeport AmyMarie Vizzo‐Paniccia, Councilwoman, 134th District, Bridgeport

Florida Marlon Bolton, Commissioner, Tamarac Dawn Pardo, Councilwoman, Riviera Beach Kenneth Thurston, Vice Mayor, Lauderhill Lee Feldman, City Manager, Fort Lauderdale Neil Kerch, Commissioner, Sunrise

Georgia Sharon Shropshire, Council Member, East point Alex Heath, Councilman, Fairburn

Illinois Chasity Wells‐Armstrong, Mayor, Kankakee

Kentucky Billy J. Phelps, Mayor, Morgantown

Louisiana Kenneth Boudreaux, Council Chairman, Lafayette

Maryland Edward Putens, Council Member, Greenbelt Silke Pope, Council woman, Greenbelt

Mississippi Gene McGee, Mayor, Ridgeland

North Carolina Kandie Smith, City Council Member, Greenville

Ohio Tara Mosley‐Samples, Councilwoman, Akron Kevin Conwell, Councilman, Cleveland Steve Patterson, Mayor, Athens

- 42 -

Oklahoma Debra Wimpee, City Councilor, Broken Arrow Mike Lester, Councilor, Broken Arrow

Pennsylvania Peter Melan, Councilman, Easton

South Carolina James Jenkins, Mayor Pro‐Tem, Cayce

Tennessee Rhonda Jerome, Councilmember, North Charleston Kay Senter, Vice Mayor, Morristown

Texas Richard Fregoe, Council Member, Grand Prairie Angela Miner, Council Member At‐Large, Plano Roxanne Thalman, City Council Member, Arlington B. Adam McGough, Dallas City Council Member, Dallas

Washington Yolanda Trout‐Manuel, City Council, Auburn

West Virginia Paul Thornton, Community Development Director, vienna

Wyoming Randy Adams, Mayor Pro‐tem, Torrington

- 43 -

- 44 -

public safety and crime prevention...presentation on nlc’s advocacy work to advance the...

Documents