Law and Legislation Committee Meeting - April 6, 2021

The Law and Legislation Committee met via teleconference on Tuesday, April 6, 2021 at 1:02 PM to consider a consent calendar item and a discussion item regarding an ordinance related to laid-off employee recall rights during the COVID-19 pandemic. All four members (Eric Guerra, Jeff Harris, Katie Valenzuela, and Chair Jay Schenirer) were present. The meeting adjourned at 2:09 PM.

Consent Calendar

• Item 1: Law and Legislation Log – Approved unanimously (4-0) as part of the consent calendar.

Public Comments & Testimony

On Item 2 (Recall Rights Ordinance):

• Several workers and union representatives expressed support for the ordinance, arguing it would provide job security for hospitality, event, and janitorial workers who lost jobs through no fault of their own. Speakers included Benjamin Greger (Citizen Hotel employee, 12 years), Antonio Morales (Sheraton Hotel, 21 years), Indriqueta Layuni (Citizen Hotel housekeeper, expressed need for health insurance and job security), Jesus Guerrero (Holiday Inn Downtown Plaza, 16 years), Ty Hudson (Unite Here Local 49, stressed recall rights had expired for union and non-union workers), Fabrizio Sasso (Sacramento Central Labor Council), Maria Garcia (Sacramento City St. Hotel, 10 years), and Andrew Gross-Gaitan (SEIU, representing janitors and security officers).
• Opposition was voiced by Sarah Aquilano (Visit Sacramento), who argued hotels are already doing their best and government intervention is unnecessary; Brandon Black (Sacramento Metro Chamber), who called the ordinance an overregulation that alters at-will employment and exposes the city to litigation; and Matt Sutton (Restaurant Association), who said it would hamper flexibility in rehiring and that restaurants already prioritize former employees.
• Committee members asked questions clarifying the scope and impact.

On Matters Not on the Agenda:

• Chris Lawson and Kim Mims (ARCC – American Redress Coalition of California) urged the committee to support a resolution endorsing state and federal reparations efforts, including AB 3121 (California Reparations Task Force) and enhanced versions of HR 40 and S 40. They requested the City of Sacramento adopt a resolution and consider local reparations initiatives.

Discussion Items

Item 2: Ordinance Relating to Laid-Off Employee Recall Rights Related to COVID-19

• Peter Lemos, Code and Housing Enforcement Chief, presented the history and background of the proposed ordinance, noting it had been deferred multiple times due to pending state legislation and concerns from stakeholders. He explained the original proposal required employers with 50+ employees to offer recall rights by seniority. However, the current version under consideration was a narrowed substitute submitted by Unite Here Local 49 in correspondence, focusing on hotels, event centers, and commercial property workers.
• Councilmember Jeff Harris opposed the ordinance, characterizing it as a "solution in search of a problem" and argued that businesses naturally rehire former employees and that the city lacks enforcement capacity. He suggested a resolution supporting best practices instead.
• Councilmember Eric Guerra supported forwarding the narrowed ordinance to council as a stopgap measure for the hardest-hit workers, mostly women of color and immigrants. He emphasized the need for stakeholder meetings between labor and business.
• Councilmember Katie Valenzuela seconded the motion, stating the ordinance is a preventative measure to ensure equity in the recovery and noting that good actors already comply but the law protects against bad actors.
• Chair Jay Schenirer expressed hesitance, requesting more data on which hotels already practice recall rights and which have received government assistance. He proposed that the ordinance's sunset be tied to a specific employment recovery level (e.g., 85-90% of pre-pandemic employment).
• Assistant City Attorney Matthew Ruyak clarified that the motion would substitute the new proposed language, which would be scrubbed for legal consistency before going to council.

Key Outcomes

• Motion (Guerra/Valenzuela): Passed 2-1 (Guerra and Valenzuela yes; Harris no; Schenirer abstain) to forward the narrowed ordinance (as submitted by Unite Here in correspondence) to the full City Council for approval. The motion included: (1) substituting the original ordinance with the narrower version targeting hotels, event centers, and commercial property workers; (2) keeping the five-day turnaround for recall offers; (3) authorizing the City Attorney to edit the language for code consistency; (4) directing staff to facilitate stakeholder meetings between labor and business prior to council; and (5) exploring a sunset tied to employment levels (e.g., when the industry reaches 85-90% of pre-pandemic employment).
• The committee also heard public comments on reparations but took no formal action on that matter.