5 Ways Cities Can Promote Afterschool and Summer Meal Programs

Providing meals for children through federal Afterschool and Summer Meal Programs is a win-win opportunity for cities. Cities benefit by bringing more federal funds into their neighborhoods, and can improve the health and well-being of low-income children by increasing their access to healthy meals and their participation in fun and safe activities during out-of-school time hours.

It is important for mayors and other city leaders to build strong partnerships with stakeholders, such as statewide anti-hunger groups, schools, food banks and other community organizations, to implement meal programs in ways that maximize quality and participation. These stakeholders can serve as important outreach partners that help city leaders connect with their residents to make sure they are aware of the resources available to them.

Here are five ways that city leaders can promote afterschool and summer meal programs in their communities.

1. Use the bully pulpit to raise awareness of child hunger and promote out-of-school time meal programs. Local elected officials can write op-eds for local newspapers, emphasize the need for afterschool and summer meal programs in public speeches or at events, and promote afterschool and summer meal programs on the city’s website and through newsletters and social media. Nashville2. Publicize out-of-school time meals through a targeted marketing strategy. An important component of any marketing strategy for out-of-school time meals is a kick-off event. These events can raise awareness about meal programs in a way that brings key stakeholders and families together. Mayors can use kick-off events to frame afterschool and summer meals as a top priority for the city before a large audience of community leaders. Cities can also take advantage of existing national resources such as the National Hunger Hotline (1-866-3HUNGRY) to make meal program site locations and operating hours easily accessible to families. In addition, cities can advertise information about meal sites on utility bills, via robo-calls, or through the city’s 311 information line or the United Way’s 211 information line. Philadelphia3. Sponsor Afterschool or Summer Meal Programs. City agencies such as parks and recreation or departments of housing are well-suited to be sponsors of afterschool and summer meal programs and to host meal sites at local facilities, e.g., recreation centers. Staff from a mayor’s office can also coordinate a working group or task force that focuses on the issue of child hunger and identifies strategies to reduce it, including initiatives to increase participation in out-of-school time meal programs. City staff relationships with key community partners, as well as knowledge of where young people congregate after school and during the summer, are integral to the success of these programs. Houston4. Partner with community organizations that serve afterschool and summer meals. Local nonprofits and other afterschool providers often act as sponsors to provide afterschool and summer meals as well as activities for young people before and/or after meals. Cities can leverage funding for meal programs in partnership with community-based organizations.Seattle5. Incorporate child nutrition goals into a broader citywide agenda. City leaders can work with staff responsible for broader citywide initiatives such as Let’s Move! Cities, Towns and Counties or other initiatives that focus on children and youth to expand the reach and scope of child nutrition programming. FontanaTo learn more, check out our new issue brief on afterschool and summer meals.

Jamie Nash bio photo About the Author: Jamie Nash is Senior Associate of Benefit Outreach in the National League of Cities’ Institute for Youth, Education, and Families. To learn more about how local government leaders can support out-of-school time meal programs, contact Jamie at nash@nlc.org.

Meet the Freshman: Rep. Brenda Lawrence

This is the first in series of closer looks at new members of Congress coming from city government office.

Brenda Lawrence bio photo

Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence.

Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-Mich.-14) is no stranger to city concerns. A lifetime resident of the Detroit area, Rep. Lawrence spent 17 years prior to her election to Congress in city government, first as a city council member and then mayor of Southfield, a suburb of Detroit with over 72,000 residents.

Rep. Lawrence’s work in Southfield positioned her to be a champion for city residents. During her time as mayor, she led her city in partnership with NLC on a number of initiatives, including Let’s Move! Cities, Towns and Counties, the Cities United violence prevention initiative, and the Mayors’ Action Challenge for Children and Families. She has most recently served NLC as a member of the NLC University Board of Advisors. Rep. Lawrence has also previously worked with Mayors Against Illegal Guns as part of an effort to curb gun violence. She has the distinction of becoming the first female and first African-American mayor of Southfield, and the first African-American female Democratic Lieutenant Governor nominee in Michigan.

“I’ve been fortunate to have served as a mayor who has provided perspective to Congress like in the aftermath of the home mortgage foreclosure crisis,” said Representative Lawrence about her time spent in city government. “[I] have lobbied for and administered federal block grant dollars that are used to enhance and improve services at home. So while I’m a freshman member, I’m certainly not new to the federal government process. Equally important, I truly understand the needs of our nation’s cities.”

Representative Lawrence was appointed to serve as a “Senior Whip” for the House Democratic Caucus by Congressman Steny Hoyer of Maryland. She will serve on the influential House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has oversight responsibility for federal agency activity and regulations.

Learn more about Rep. Lawrence and the other freshman members of Congress using NLC’s interactive map tool.

Panettieri photoAbout the author: Angelina Panettieri is the Senior Associate for Grassroots Advocacy at the National League of Cities. She helps empower city leaders to engage directly with Congress on the issues most important to them.

Collaborative Government is Here to Stay

This is a guest post by Alan Mond.

collaborative government blog post photoHeavy equipment like the bulldozers pictured above could be shared more often between public agencies in the future. (Alex Banner)

Whether you know it or not, you are already affected by the sharing economy. In fact, you are likely a part of it. Car rentals, taxi rides, hotel accommodations and even the food we eat are all products of the sharing economy. Sharing economy companies like Uber, Airbnb and ZipCar have quickly become household names.

I believe that government is the next sector that is ready to play a role in the sharing economy.

Government is naturally collaborative. Cities, counties and towns don’t necessarily compete with each other – they just happen to be in different geographic jurisdictions, and they already share the very important goal of delivering valuable services to taxpaying citizens in the most efficient manner. The idea of government sharing resources existed long before the sharing economy ever became part of our cultural landscape. In the case of mutual aid agreements (contracts signed between municipalities for emergency situations), most units of governments join forces to support each other. The term collaborative government is a new way of referring to this growing trend we are seeing at the local, state and even federal levels.

Providers in the sharing economy are solving problems that typically aren’t addressed by the prevalent economic framework. For example, heavy duty equipment used by pubic works departments, such as excavators and street sweepers, is expensive to buy and costly to maintain. Geographic regions are composed of large and small municipalities with fleet utilization discrepancies. Large municipalities often have more equipment than they need. Smaller communities lack heavy-duty equipment and often resort to renting from expensive commercial rental shops or contractors.

The logical solution to these problems would be for a large city to loan equipment to a smaller city in order to reduce equipment expenses for both parties. In my work, I often ask city managers why this doesn’t happen more often, and I usually receive an all-too-common answer: liability. Liability seems to be the main reason city staff often avoid the otherwise sound practice of sharing resources. When I dug deeper, I discovered that “liability” was really a blanket term for two specific concerns: property damage to the machines involved, and liability in the case of operator injury. Because underutilized equipment is such an enormous problem, my business partners and I decided to attack the liability issue in order to remove the primary barrier to sharing.

In my recent blog post, “Five Tips to Write a Shared Services Agreement,” I outlined some of the general tips to writing a shared services agreement. After working with over twenty-five different local government attorneys, my company was able to create a workable intergovernmental agreement. On the property damage side of things, we established simple rules of the game. For example, we decided that, if a piece of equipment was incidentally damaged, the renter or borrower was responsible. Regarding the liability issue, we solved the problem by requiring that all participating agencies show proof of insurance covering liability, property of others, and workers’ compensation.

This was a great victory. Risk managers, city attorneys, city managers and even finance directors were happy with the resulting agreement. However, not all Public Works Directors were convinced. Some of the common questions asked were: “What if I need my excavator exactly when a neighboring community had borrowed it?” and “What if I have a water main break and someone is using my Vactor truck?”.

As I mentioned before, collaborative government is not a new concept, and we were able to address all of these questions. We asked for advice from public works directors who were already sharing resources. Some of these folks had been sharing equipment within the states of Oregon and Minnesota, for example; some had been sharing for more than 20 years on a smaller scale. They told us the answers were simple.

Developing trust and relationships as a first step was highly recommended. Equally as important was the idea that owners should have the right to retrieve their equipment at any time should emergencies arise. This made a lot of sense – if the city that rented the equipment knew that it might be needed in an emergency, then they would understandably return the machine. Most of the equipment that is made available by companies such as ours typically comes with an operator, so the equipment often returns to the owner’s yard at the end of the day.

In my experience, many barriers to operating as part of the sharing economy can be removed through the development and establishment of best practices, enabling federal, state and local governments and their agencies to collaborate and share resources more effectively.

Alan Mond bio photo croppedAbout the Author: Alan Mond is the CEO of MuniRent, a web-based platform that makes it easy for local governments to lease heavy duty equipment to other local governments. He will be hosting a webinar, “The Path to Efficient Government Fleets”, on January 29 at 10am. You can also connect with him on LinkedIn or follow him on Twitter at @mondalan.

Local Governments Win Cell Tower Supreme Court Case – For the Most Part

cell towerThe City of Roswell lost its case before the Supreme Court regarding cell phone tower approval on what some might describe as a mere technicality – but overall, local governments won. (Getty Images)

In T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell, the Supreme Court held 6-3 that the Telecommunications Act (TCA) requires local governments to provide reasons when denying an application to build a cell phone tower. The reasons do not have to be stated in the denial letter but must be articulated “with sufficient clarity in some other written record issued essentially contemporaneously with the denial,” which can include the council meeting minutes.

The Court agreed with the position in the State and Local Legal Center (SLLC)’s amicus brief that the reasons for a local government’s decision need not be in the same letter or document that denies the application, and that council meeting minutes can be a sufficient source for the reasons for the denial. The Court disagreed, however, with the SLLC’s argument that the council minutes need not be issued contemporaneously with the document denying the wireless provider’s application.

T-Mobile applied to construct a 108-foot cell tower in a residential zoning area. Two days after a council hearing on the application, where city councilmembers voted to deny the application and stated various reasons for why they were going to vote against it, Roswell sent T-Mobile a brief letter stating that the application was denied and that T-Mobile could obtain hearing minutes from the city clerk. Twenty-six days later the minutes were approved and published.

The TCA requires that a state or local government’s decision denying a cell tower construction permit be “in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record.”

The majority of the Court, in an opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, held that local governments have to provide reasons for why they are denying a cell tower application so that courts can determine whether the denial was supported by substantial evidence. The Court rejected, however, T-Mobile’s argument that the reasons must be set forth in a formal written decision denying the application instead of council meeting minutes because nothing in the TCA “imposes any requirement that the reasons be given in any particular form.” But the Court also held that, because wireless providers have only 30 days after an adverse decision to seek judicial review, the council meeting minutes setting forth the reasons have to be issued “essentially contemporaneous[ly]”with the denial.

The Court’s ruling that written minutes can meet the TCA’s “in writing” requirement is favorable to local governments, many of which routinely compile meeting minutes regardless of whether a cell tower application is being considered. But the Court’s requirement that a local government issue a denial letter and minutes at more or less the same time will be new to many local governments, and, as Chief Justice Roberts points out in his dissenting opinion, “could be a trap for the unwary hamlet or two.”

Following this decision, local governments should not issue any written denial of a wireless siting application until they (1) set forth the reasons for the denial in that written decision, or (2) make available to the wireless provider the final council meeting minutes or transcript of the meeting at which the action was taken.

The Roberts’ Court has been frequently characterized as “pro-business.” Justice Roberts’ dissent belies that viewpoint.  His opinion repeatedly refers to T-Mobile’s savvy and culminates in this sarcastic assessment of how T-Mobile likely suffered no harm by receiving the minutes after the denial: “T-Mobile somehow managed to make the tough call to seek review of the denial of an application it had spent months and many thousands of dollars to obtain, based on a hearing it had attended.”

Tim LayJessica Bell, and Katharine Mapes of Spiegel & McDiarmid in Washington, D.C., wrote the SLLC’s brief which was joined by the National League of Cities, the United States Conference of Mayors,  the National Association of Counties, the International City/County Management Association, and the International Municipal Lawyers Association.

Lisa Soronen bio photoAbout the Author: Lisa Soronen is the Executive Director of the State and Local Legal Center and a regular contributor to CitiesSpeak.

This Year, Cities Have Got You Covered

This blog post was co-written by Carla Plaza, consultant to NLC’s Cities Expanding Health Access for Children and Families initiative.

Children Receive Emergency Care At Pediatric HospitalEight cities are taking bold new steps to increase Medicaid and CHIP enrollment this year. (Getty Images)

Yes, it’s that time of year again. I’m not talking about the NFL playoffs or flu season, though. It’s the Affordable Care Act’s open enrollment period (November 15, 2014 to February 15, 2015). Enrollment in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), however, is available year round for eligible families and children.

The eight cities participating in NLC’s Cities Expanding Health Access for Children and Families (CEHACF) initiative are leveraging the renewed focus on health insurance to get more families and children in their communities enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP.

One of the lessons learned from the CEHACF cities so far is that strong messages are effective when they come from trusted community voices. Mayor Randy Walker of Garden City, Mich., and Mayor Bill Peduto of Pittsburgh have used the bully pulpit to encourage their residents to get health coverage, and are featured prominently in PSAs about Medicaid and CHIP.

Healthy Together is committed to enrolling all Pittsburgh children and youth in quality, no- to low-cost healthcare programs, like Medicaid and CHIP.

One of the main Cover Jacksonville campaign strategies has been to develop a streamlined, single point of access referral system for community residents. Working in partnership with the United Way of Northeast Florida, the campaign team trained 211 call staff to incorporate questions about health insurance enrollment into their conversations with callers. 211 operators can now make appointments for callers with an enrollment assistor at a convenient location.

Dallas is finalizing the process of becoming a Community Partner with the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. As a Community Partner, staff at city agencies that work in community centers as well as child care and homelessness services can become trained enrollment assistors. Clients visiting any of these city agencies will then be screened for and enrolled in all of the benefits for which they are eligible through the YourTexasBenefits program – including Medicaid and CHIP.

The New Bedford, Mass. campaign team is working closely with school nurses to educate students and their families about the importance of health care coverage and access. This partnership is also generating awareness about their school-based campaign and enrollment events.

Together with local health care providers, New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell and Dr. Brenda Weis, Director of the New Bedford Health Department, participate in promotional video for the city of New Bedford’s new health initiative.

Recognizing the importance of the tourism industry in their city, Savannah, Ga.’s campaign team is targeting the hotel and hospitality industry to get their employees and employees’ families enrolled. The team is working with local businesses to ensure that families and children get the coverage they need.

Finally, Providence, R.I. is targeting older youth and recruiting them to become health ambassadors who would spread the word about the importance of coverage to their families and friends. In Hattiesburg, Miss., campaign staff are working with their faith-based community to help spread the message of the importance of health coverage. The team trained some church members to be enrollment assistors, which allowed for onsite enrollment assistance following church services.

What is your city doing to help enroll children and families in Medicaid and CHIP? Share your story with us!

Dawn Schluckebeir_headshot

About the Author: Dawn Schluckebier is a Senior Associate for Family Economic Success in NLC’s Institute for Youth, Education, and Families. Follow Dawn on Twitter at @TheSchluck. Email Dawn at schluckebier@nlc.org to share your city’s story or get more information on the CEHACF cities’ campaigns.

Next Monday, Be a Part of the Movement with the #CitiesServe Hashtag

This is a guest post by Mari Andrew.

Candlelight Vigil Marks 44th Anniversary Of Martin Luther King Jr.'s AssassinationThe Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial in Washington, D.C. (Getty Images)

On January 19, cities across the nation will celebrate the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by promoting service and civic engagement. Dr. King’s courageous and tireless work toward his vision of equality inspired legislators to transform the King Holiday into a day of volunteer service – a day when people from diverse backgrounds could join forces to make their communities better places to live.

The Corporation for National & Community Service conservatively estimated that, on last year’s Day of Service, 360,000 people received emergency food provisions, 38,000 veterans and military members received assistance, and 58,000 youth received tutoring. Citizens in all 50 states participated in projects that refurbished schools, supported job-seekers, and collected clothing. This year, the projects are numerous and quickly growing.

In West Hollywood, California, volunteers of all ages will beautify their local elementary school by painting a mural. Residents of Beverly, Massachusetts have made a commitment to read with preschool children during the entire week. A Philadelphia charter school will be taking donations for their women’s shelter, a community in Fort Lauderdale will revitalize the home of an elderly woman, a nature-loving group in San Jose will make improvements to park trails, and residents of the Twin Cities will work together to sort donations that support services for people with disabilities.

Ready to join the movement? The National League of Cities wants to know what your city has planned for this year’s MLK Day of Service. We invite you to share your volunteer plans for the holiday on Twitter or Facebook using the hashtag #CitiesServe. We’ll be posting pictures and updates from your community’s projects next week, and we look forward to seeing cities in action!

Mari Andrew bio photoAbout the author: Mari Andrew is the Senior Associate of Marketing at the National League of Cities. She works hard to help city leaders build better communities, and believes the world would be a better place if people wore more colorful clothing.

Five Steps to Get to Know Your New Legislator

capitoldomeOn Feb. 6, 2015, new senators and representatives will be officially sworn in to the 114th Congress. (Getty Images)

Do you remember your first day of freshman orientation? Did you feel lost on the large campus, worried about making new connections with your classmates, or excited about new opportunities?

This week, as the 114th Congress convenes, 69 new senators and representatives will have that same experience. These new members of Congress start from scratch – they must hire staff, establish district offices, sift through the mountain of mail that began piling up Nov. 5, and navigate the committee and caucus pecking order of Capitol Hill – all while still finding their way around the campus!

That’s why now is the time to establish a strong working relationship with your new senator or representative and his or her staff. Over the coming months and years, many other people and interests will compete for your legislator’s time, attention, and sympathy – and the sooner you connect with your legislator, the better.

Here are five ways that you can make sure to connect with your freshman and make a positive impression from the start:

  1. Make the time to meet in-person. Members of Congress and their senior staff consistently say that the most effective advocacy happens in a face-to-face meeting. If you attend the National League of Cities’ Congressional City Conference in March, you’ll have time to meet with your senators and with House staff (the House will not be in session that week). You can also choose a time during a district work period to meet with your legislator closer to home. Either way, make the time to meet in person, not just over the phone.
  2. Do your homework. During the campaign, and in prior public office, your member of Congress probably shared their opinions on a wide variety of issues. In addition to learning about your legislator’s personal, educational, and professional background, use public statements, campaign promises, and previous actions to understand his or her likely positions on your city’s federal priorities.
  3. Be an asset, not a problem. All members of Congress are busy, but new members with a skeleton staff and many logistical decisions to make are particularly busy. Offer yourself to the office as a resource and information channel for your community. Make your advocacy requests clear and easy to understand. Your new legislator and his or her staff will be more likely to call upon you for your input – and to take your requests and concerns seriously – if you establish yourself as reliable, trustworthy, and easy to work with. Even if your new legislator is from the opposing party, make an effort to build a strong working relationship from the start.
  4. Don’t neglect staff. In the first 90 days after taking office, new members of Congress scramble to fully staff their Washington and district offices. The first staff hired are likely your legislator’s most trusted advisors. As you get to know your new freshman, be sure to get to know his or her chief of staff, legislative director, and district chief of staff. These staff members’ opinions and perceptions carry a lot of weight with their bosses.
  5. Follow up. Advocacy is a marathon, not a sprint. After you have made your initial outreach, follow up by keeping in regular touch, inviting your legislator to visit important sites in the community, thanking them when they meet with you or provide assistance, sending them and their staff regular updates on the progress of your city’s federal priorities, and connecting on social media.

Panettieri photoAbout the author: Angelina Panettieri is the Senior Associate for Grassroots Advocacy at the National League of Cities. She helps empower city leaders to engage directly with Congress on the issues most important to them.

Mayors: A Responsive City Needs Great Internet Access

This is a guest post by Susan Crawford.

fiber opticsIn theory, fiber-optic cables have the capacity to transmit data at unlimited speeds. As of this writing, data has been successfully transmitted at more than 40 terabits per second – fast enough to allow you to upload a 1TB hard drive in 1/5th of a second. (Getty Images)

A recent Webby Awards/Harris Interactive poll found that consumers – constituents, in other words – have come to expect real-time tracking, same-day delivery, and the opportunity to provide instant feedback regarding every service and business they encounter. 80 percent of respondents said they expect payments to be handled automatically, 85 percent expect to see reviews from other customers, and 60 percent expect services to learn about their preferences. In the next five years, these expectations are only going to be higher; nearly 50 percent of respondents said they expect that there will be a service within the next five years that ships them products they need before they order them.

Meanwhile, the digital divide in U.S. cities remains staggering. 56 percent of Detroit households don’t have what the FCC calls “fixed broadband subscriptions” (meaning anything other than dial-up or mobile devices), and 40 percent have no Internet access at all (meaning they have no wired or mobile access). More than 36 percent of Cleveland residents have no Internet access at all. Miami, New York City, Los Angeles, Boston, Washington, D.C. and Chicago are all on the list as well. (Here’s the full ranking of cities with more than 50,000 residents.)

Mayors know that public trust in the institutions of the federal government is at record low levels these days. But mayors also know that public trust in local government remains strong. Mayors get things done; they don’t have time to play polarized, corrosive politics.

And here’s the kicker: polls show that world-class Internet access is becoming a voting issue in America.

What can a mayor do to ensure (a) the services his or her city is providing meet constituents’ expectations (keeping trust in the effectiveness of local government high), (b) all of his or her constituents have world-class, reasonably priced, high capacity Internet access where they live, work and play (so that every resident is treated with dignity and given the opportunity to thrive), and (c) constituents are convinced that tomorrow will be better than today?

The answer lies in municipal fiber. Its time has come.

Without city-controlled fiber-optic lines connecting municipal buildings and the pulsing infrastructure of the city – transport, energy, water, sewage, public safety etc. – your city won’t be able to gather, aggregate, visualize, collaborate over, ship around among agencies, report on, or even use the data you should know about in order to effectively manage a 21st century municipality. (You’ll find a useful set of case studies reporting on the exciting intersections among cities and data in my recent book, “The Responsive City,” co-authored with Stephen Goldsmith.) Only fiber has the symmetric (both upload and download) capacity you’ll need to handle these floods of data. And once it’s in, it’s good for decades – to upgrade, all you’ll need to do is swap out the electronics at the end points. As far as scientists can tell, fiber has an unlimited capacity to carry information. And in order to provide the digital window on your city that your voters will increasingly demand – the predictions, easy payment mechanisms, real-time services, visual feedback and data-driven policies they will expect from all interactions – you’ll need fiber.

Those fiber-optic lines linking city infrastructure need to be controlled by the city; your constituents need reasonably-priced connectivity. Starting with city buildings is a good way to launch a city network. Just ask my hometown of Santa Monica, California, which saved so much money by dropping leased services and wiring its municipal buildings itself that it now provides service to businesses – and is ready to move to fiber to the home.

And municipal fiber is how you can close the digital divide that is the scourge of so many U.S. cities. Think of that divide, now amplifying and entrenching existing social problems in your city, as similar to a failure to provide a functional street grid. You don’t have to provide retail services yourself, just as you don’t have to provide the cars and businesses that use your streets. Consider the case of Ammon, Idaho, a small conservative town that built a passive fiber (as opposed to fiber-optic) network over which a host of competing service providers can sell directly to residents. Only a city builds streets; similarly, no private company would have an incentive to serve everyone with basic infrastructure, but every private company will rejoice in having reasonably-priced, unlimited communications capacity as a basic input into everything it needs to do. For more evidence, look at Chattanooga, Tennessee.

Finally, the excitement, pride, and relief of people who see that their city is capable of great things will add up to votes for the leaders involved. People are aching for reliable, effective, nonpartisan leadership. They still trust their mayors, many of whom have recently joined Next Century Cities to learn more about municipal fiber.

​Now that about twenty states have put barriers in place making community high speed Internet access initiatives difficult (and we know additional state barriers will be proposed this year), local leaders are also banding together in the Coalition for Local Internet Choice to oppose barriers to local choice.​

Why? Because these state-imposed limits are bad for the communities involved, bad for the private sector, and bad for America’s global competitiveness. 2015 looks like a good year for forward thinking.

Susan Crawford bio photoAbout the author: Susan Crawford is the John A. Reilly Visiting Professor in Intellectual Property at the Harvard Law School (2014) and a co-director of the Berkman Center. She is the author of Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age, co-author of The Responsive City: Engaging Communities Through Data-Smart Governance, and a contributor to Medium.com’s Backchannel.

NLC Joins Amicus Brief Contemplating Fourth Amendment Challenges

hotel registryAt issue in this particular amicus brief is the question of whether or not police should be allowed to inspect hotel registries without first obtaining a warrant. (Getty Images)

The State and Local Legal Center’s (SLLC) Supreme Court amicus brief in Los Angeles v. Patel, which the National League of Cities joined, makes a number of traditional amicus arguments: it asks the Court to not rule that state and local governments can be sued for yet another thing; it points out that, if a ruling against the city is established in this case, many other cities and states will be affected; and it states that a ruling against the city will likely impact many similar but unrelated statutes and ordinance.

Los Angeles v. Patel concerns a Los Angeles city ordinance which requires hotel and motel operators to keep specific information about their guests and allows police to inspect guest registries without warrants. Motel operators claim this ordinance is facially invalid under the Fourth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court agreed, stating that the ordinance fails to expressly provide for pre-compliance judicial review before police can inspect the registry.

The State and Local Legal Center (SLLC) filed a Supreme Court amicus brief in Los Angeles v. Patel arguing that Fourth Amendment facial challenges should be disfavored, and that if the ordinance in this case is unconstitutional, similar hotel registry ordinances across the country—and laws and ordinances requiring record keeping and inspection of other businesses—may be unconstitutional as well.

A facial challenge to the ordinance in this case requires a court to determine whether all searches that might be conducted pursuant to the ordinance are unconstitutional (as opposed to an as-applied challenge where the court would decide whether a particular search under the ordinance violates the Fourth Amendment).

The SLLC argues that Fourth Amendment facial challenges don’t make sense, because whether a search violates the Fourth Amendment depends on whether it is reasonable, which is necessarily a fact-based determination. Under some set of facts, almost any search would be reasonable. For example, depending on the facts, warrantless searches of hotel registries could be reasonable under the “community care-taking exception,” because the registry is “in plain view,” or because of “exigent circumstances.”

The SLLC’s brief notes that hotel registry ordinances are very common and all may be invalidated if the Court concludes Los Angeles’s ordinance violates the Fourth Amendment. Los Angeles cites two state laws (Maine, Massachusetts) and over 100 hotel registry ordinances from 28 states. The SLLC’s brief points out that at least 70 California cities have such ordinances, as do cities in 15 additional states.  Finally, in many states mobile home parks, second-hand dealers like pawnshops and junkyards, scrap metal dealers, and massage parlors are subject to registration and inspection laws and ordinances. These measures may be called into question if Los Angeles’s hotel registry ordinance is struck down.

Tom McCarthyWilliam Consovoy, and Michael Connolly of Consovoy McCarthy and the George Mason University School of Law Supreme Court Clinic wrote the SLLC’s brief, which was joined by the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, the International City/County Management Association, the United States Conference of Mayors, and the International Municipal Lawyers Association.

Lisa Soronen bio photoAbout the Author: Lisa Soronen is the Executive Director of the State and Local Legal Center and a regular contributor to CitiesSpeak.

Cities Can Help Close the Meal Gap on Weekends and Holidays

Holiday meals - blogCity agencies can serve meals and reach more children by utilizing existing resources. (Getty Images)

During the weekends and holidays, many of us look forward to spending quality time with our family and friends, and much of that time is spent around the dinner table. It is important to remember, though, that many children and families will go hungry this holiday season – just as many children do on the weekends when they don’t have access to federal Afterschool and Summer Meal Programs. For many families across the country, the Afterschool and Summer Meal Programs provide healthy meals that parents and caretakers rely on to help ensure their kids are fed during out-of-school time hours. Providing meals on weekends and holidays is a great opportunity for these programs to reach even more kids. Local leaders and city agencies that sponsor meal programs can help fill a critical need by building off of their existing programs to serve weekend and holiday meals. Under the federal Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), public agencies such as public housing authorities and parks and recreation departments, as well as schools, nonprofits (e.g., Boys and Girls Clubs, YMCAs) and faith-based organizations are eligible to serve meals and snacks on weekends and holidays. Many meal program sponsors find it challenging to fully staff their meal sites on weekends and holidays, but they can work with vendors and other partnering organizations to develop a plan to gradually phase in weekend and holiday meals based on existing enrichment programs. A gradual, phased approach could provide sponsors with needed flexibility to respond to staffing and funding needs. Below are a few strategies for cities that are thinking about serving meals on weekends and holidays:

  • Utilize existing staff and staff from volunteer programs: In Minneapolis, the Nite Owlz late night teen program is held primarily in inner city parks on Friday and Saturday nights. They are currently expanding their meal service program, and the involvement of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board would allow this program to extend healthy food choices to over 350 teens each weekend night throughout the year.
  • Develop creative partnerships between city agencies and community partners: In Washington, D.C., a strong partnership between the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), and Metroball, a local nonprofit summer basketball league, has helped to reach over 300 teenagers on Saturdays during the summer. DPR acts as the meal program sponsor and serves the meals at the basketball league sites, and the local police department helps spread the word about the program. Summer meals sites are open in D.C. on Saturdays at select Department of Parks and Recreation Centers, D.C. Public Library locations and community-based organizations.
  • Start by serving one meal on Saturdays during the school year. There are approximately 40 Saturdays during the school year, and these days provide a great opportunity for sponsors that implement the Afterschool Meal Program during the school year to serve meals one additional day per week.

For more information on serving weekend and holiday meals, check out the Food Research and Action Center’s resources, including this Afterschool Meal Matters recorded call.

Jamie Nash bio photo
About the Author:
Jamie Nash is Senior Associate of Benefit Outreach in the National League of Cities’ Institute for Youth, Education, and Families. To learn more about how local government leaders can support out-of-school time meal programs, contact Jamie at nash@nlc.org.