On Monday, I wrote about California Government Code Section 8629 which provides:

"The Governor shall proclaim the termination of a state of emergency at the earliest possible date that conditions warrant.  All of the powers granted the Governor by this chapter with respect to a state of emergency shall terminate when the state of emergency has been terminated by proclamation of the Governor or by concurrent resolution of the Legislature declaring it at an end."

That post focused on the Governor's obligation to proclaim a termination of a state of emergency.  The second sentence of the statute provides that a state of emergency may also be terminated by a concurrent legislative resolution.

Last week, Assembly Members Kevin Kiley and James Gallagher introduced a concurrent resolution to that effect.  The authors do not contend that the Wuhan virus has disappeared or that it has ceased to exist.  Rather, the resolution notes that the definition of a "state of emergency" requires "not merely conditions of extreme peril, but also the inadequacy of state and local institutions to combat the threat within the constraints of the California Constitution".  The resolution further recites that the "Governor has provided a pathway for counties to attest to the ability to locally manage the response to the COVID-19 virus and to accordingly reopen many businesses and activities, and 29 of 58 counties have so far attested, with 53 total counties believed to be eligible to attest as of May 18, 2020". 

Although several assembly members and senators have signed on as co-authors, the resolution faces a partisan hurdle.  All of the co-authors are Republicans and Democrats enjoy a majority in both houses.