BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:March 22, 2010 |Bill No:SB |
| |1084 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Gloria Negrete McLeod, Chair
Bill No: SB 1084Author:Liu
As Introduced: February 17, 2010 Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: California Economic Security Task Force: poverty.
SUMMARY: Creates a two-year Task Force that will prepare and submit
public reports on the State's anti-poverty programs that would provide
recommendations to the Governor and Legislature on how to increase
economic security.
Existing law:
1) Establishes the biennial California Economic Strategy Panel (CES
Panel), chaired by the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (L&WD
Agency) Secretary, to develop an overall state economic vision and
strategy that can guide public policy, including, examination of
the state's economic regions, industry clusters and cross-regional
economic issues.
2) Requires the CES Panel to prepare a California Economic Development
Strategic Plan (Plan) which includes:
a) A statement of economic goals for the state.
b) Proposals for legislation, regulations and administrative
reforms necessary to improve the business climate and economy of
the state.
c) Evaluation of the effectiveness of the state's economic
development programs.
SB 1084
Page 2
d) A list of industries in which the state shall focus its
economic development efforts, strategies to foster job growth and
economic development programs in all state agencies, offices,
boards, and commissions.
3) Establishes various social service programs that provide cash
assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families and
individuals.
This bill:
1) Establishes the California Economic Security Task Force (Task
Force).
2) Requires the Task Force to consist of the following 25 members or
their designees:
a) Three members from the Senate, with at least one member from
the minority party, appointed by the President pro Tempore.
b) Three members from the Assembly, with at least one member from
the minority party, appointed by the Speaker.
c) The Secretaries of the Business, Transportation and Housing
Agency, the California Health and Human Services Agency, and the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
d) The Director of the California Department of Aging.
e) The Director of Housing and Community Development.
f) The Director of Finance.
g) The Director of Mental Health.
h) The State Public Health Officer.
i) The Director of Social Services.
j) Five individuals, who represent stakeholders that provide
benefits, services, or advocacy to those living in poverty.
aa) Five individuals, who live in poverty with at least one
representative from a rural, suburban, and urban area.
SB 1084
Page 3
3) Requires the Task Force to determine and hold public meetings
quarterly, but does not specify the date of the first meeting.
4) Allows the Task Force to create subcommittees composed of its
members and non-members who are stakeholders that would provide
advice on any function of the Task Force or the Task Force's
recommendations.
a) Provides that a subcommittee may gather information and make
recommendations to the Task Force and that a subcommittee shall
not exercise any of the powers vested in the Task Force.
5) Requires the Task Force to seek input from outside groups,
organizations, and individuals to consider the actions and
recommendations of other states' poverty reduction plans, as it
deems appropriate.
6) Requires the Task Force to submit public interim and final reports
to the Governor and Legislature on necessary measures to reduce
poverty in the state by 50 percent by 2020.
7) Requires both reports to:
a) Review in detail current rates of "economic security" -
defined as having the income necessary to cover basic needs
expenses.
i) These rates will be reviewed using the California Family
Economic Self-Sufficiency Standard Index and the California
Elder Economic Security Standard Index.
b) Inventory state anti-poverty programs that increase economic
security.
8) Requires the interim report to provide specific immediate and
short-term recommendations regarding the effectiveness of state
programs and services that can be implemented beginning in 2012.
9) Requires the final report to provide the following:
a) Specific feasible long-term recommendations regarding the
State's efforts to increase economic security by reducing poverty
in the state by 50 percent by 2020.
b) An implementation plan.
SB 1084
Page 4
c) Estimates of program costs or savings.
d) The number of individuals who would benefit.
e) Specific recommendations on how to create a self-sustaining
entity to lead and coordinate the state's efforts to reduce
poverty in the state by 50 percent by 2020, considering at least
the entity's structure, necessary funding and statutory changes.
f) Specific information on each States' antipoverty program.
10)Provides that Task Force members shall serve without compensation,
but shall be reimbursed for Task Force-related expenses if Task
Force funding for this purpose is sufficient.
11)Requires the Task Force to seek funding and other resources from
philanthropic and private donations, but resources cannot pose a
conflict of interest or be inconsistent with the Task Force's
goals.
12)Allows the Task Force's work to be supported in its work by the
legislative staff and services as determined by the respective
rules committees.
13)Specifies that the Task Force shall cease to exist two years after
its initial meeting.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has been keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the County Welfare Directors
Association of California , Insight Center for Community Economic
Development , Western Center on Law and Poverty , and the Women's
Foundation of California . According to the sponsors and Author,
the state dedicates significant resources to many programs aimed at
reducing poverty and increasing economic security. They note that
because these programs are implemented across many state and county
agencies, coordination is currently very limited. In addition, they
assert that the state does not currently have a comprehensive
inventory of statewide antipoverty programs, and the Legislature
and Administration have no comprehensive statewide plan for
reducing poverty and increasing economic security. This bill would
establish a Task Force charged with developing a statewide plan for
SB 1084
Page 5
those purposes.
According to the Author, the state is not required to fund the Task
Force or its operations, but instead the bill would be funded and
receive other resources by philanthropic sources and private
donations.
2. Background. The current federal poverty standard for California is
up to $10,830 for an individual and $22,050 for a family of four.
California's poverty rate has grown to 12.8% in recent years and is
at risk of increasing rapidly due to the current recession. What's
more, a high number of working families are particularly impacted;
89% of poor families have at least one household member who is
employed. Poverty significantly impacts the lives of Californians
and the state's economic health by reducing our tax base while
simultaneously increasing demands and thus the costs of state
supported services such as health care, criminal justice, and
social services.
In addition, many of the federal funds available to Californians to
reduce poverty and increase economic security are not being drawn
down fully. As a result, many Californians at or near the poverty
line, are not receiving benefits for which they are eligible and
the state is foregoing positive economic and multiplier effects
because vital federal funds are left untapped. For instance,
according to a 2009 report by the California Food Policy Advocates,
California could receive $3.7 billion in additional federal food
stamp benefits each year if every eligible individual participated
in the program. Based on estimates from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and Moody's Economy (Economy.com,) for every
dollar that California could draw down in federally funded benefits
it could generate an additional $1.73 to $1.84 for the economy.
This is just one of the many instances in which programs aimed at
reducing poverty face significant challenges in meeting their
policy goals and reaching all eligible individuals and their
families.
3. California Economic Strategy Panel (CES Panel). The CES Panel was
established in statute October 1993, under the California
Technology, Trade and Commerce Agency, and ten years later AB 1532
moved the CES Panel to the L&WD Agency. AB 1532 also required the
CES Panel to develop a standard definition of economic development,
conduct studies related to the economic development sections of the
State Budget, and develop a system of accountability in the annual
state budget and legislative process. Ultimately the CES Panel's
purpose is to measure the performance of all state policies,
SB 1084
Page 6
programs, and tax expenditures intended to stimulate the economy
and bring about economic prosperity to the state.
Recently in 2009, the CES Panel completed their report The
California Facts, which provides economic and demographic snapshots
of the state's 58 counties and a comprehensive statewide snapshot.
Under the California Regional Economies Project (CREP), which used
the concept of regional economies and industry clusters previously
established by the CES Panel to provide an updated look at
California's economy, the CES Panel commissioned two reports
relevant to California's economic prosperity: California's Role in
the Global Economy, and Clean Technology and the Green Economy:
Growing Products, Services, Businesses and Jobs in California's
Value Network.
This measure is somewhat similar in scope to the duties of the CES
Panel. Though this bill seeks to create the Task Force to
inventory antipoverty programs and report on how to feasibly
improve their effectiveness, with the goal of cutting the state's
poverty rates in half over the next ten years, the programs the
Task Force seeks to analyze might overlap with the duties of the
CES Panel.
4. Other States' Strategic Efforts Related to Poverty Reduction
a) Colorado Economic Opportunity Poverty Reduction Task Force.
Created in 2009, the Economic Opportunity Poverty Reduction Task
Force is required to assess current state policies and practices
that promote economic opportunity and poverty reduction with
regards to:
1. Building family assets and financial stability.
2. Increasing educational opportunities.
3. Expanding the work force.
4. Using targeted tax policies to make work pay.
5. Addressing work-support issues.
The Task Force must study and evaluate federally supported and
state-supported programs that serve persons living in poverty,
including nutrition and employment programs, examine factors that
contribute to poverty and its economic impact, and before 2011,
they must develop a comprehensive plan for reducing poverty by at
least
50 percent in Colorado by 2019. The Task Force meets at least 4
times a year, and continues through July 1, 2014.
The Task Force appointed 5 subcommittees that included
SB 1084
Page 7
representatives of executive branch agencies, local governments,
business and labor organizations, education organizations,
advocates, and other individuals directly impacted by the work of
the Task Force.
b) Connecticut Child Poverty and Prevention Council. The State
Legislature established the Council in 2004. The Council is
charged to develop and promote the implementation of a ten-year
plan to reduce the number of children living in poverty in the
state by
50 percent, to establish prevention goals and recommendations, and
measure prevention service outcomes in order to promote the
health and well being of children and families.
The Child Poverty Council has developed partnerships with several
state agencies, the legislative branch and non-governmental
agencies working towards the development of an effective and
comprehensive plan of action. Their initial plan was completed
in January 2005; its first set of recommendations to the
legislature and executive branch. The specific charges to the
Council include:
1. Identify and analyze the occurrence of child poverty in
the state.
2. Analyze the long-term effects of child poverty.
3. Analyze the costs of child poverty to municipalities and
the state.
4. Conduct an inventory of statewide public and private
programs that address child poverty.
5. Document the percentage of target population served by
such programs.
6. Identify and analyze any deficiencies or inefficiencies
of such programs.
7. Develop procedures and priorities for implementing
strategies to achieve a 50-percent reduction in child poverty,
including
a. Vocational Training
b. Educational Opportunities
c. Housing
d. Day Care and After School Programs
e. Health Care Access
f. Treatment Programs and Services
g. Child Nutrition
a) Louisiana Child Poverty Reduction Council (Council). In the
SB 1084
Page 8
summer of 2008, the Louisiana Legislature created the Child
Poverty Prevention Council and the Child Poverty Prevention Fund.
The goal is to pursue programs, which will reduce child poverty
in the state by 50% over the next 10 years. The Council has 19
member organizations that represent the State Legislature, State
executive agencies, business and labor groups, higher education
institutions, and nonprofit advocacy groups.
The Council's implementation plan and first major body of work
focused on four major priority recommendations:
1. Improve birth outcomes.
2. Be a national model for comprehensive, evidence-based,
early childhood education initiatives.
3. Strengthen disadvantaged youth connections to school and
work.
4. Raise the state's Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).
The Council is required to establish public-private partnerships
and seek private sector funding to be used with public funds to
support solutions to poverty initiatives with the greatest
potential for reducing child poverty. The Council must also seek
funding for grant programs targeted at local government entities,
nonprofit organizations, faith-based organizations, and other
qualified community-based organizations that directly serve the
people of Louisiana.
1. Stable Funding Source. In order for the Task Force to be
effective, it must secure sufficient funding for the initial
two-year period, as well as fulfill its recommendations on how to
create a self-sustaining entity to lead and coordinate the state's
efforts to reduce poverty in the state by 50 percent by 2020. As
previously stated, the Author's intention is to seek private
funding for the coordination of these efforts to review current
programs, make recommendations, and ultimately reduce poverty. The
three aforementioned states that are similar to the proposed Task
Force do somehow rely on government resources and/or funds, and
generally plan to operate for at least five years. This sets SB
1084 slightly apart from its model initiatives in terms of funding,
and could pose some challenges for the continued implementation of
their work.
California, however, has previous experience with government
entities funded entirely by private sources, specifically, the
Governor's Committee on Education Excellence. The Committee was
created in April 2005 as an independent, nonpartisan group charged
SB 1084
Page 9
with examining K-12 education in California and recommending steps
to improve the performance of public schools. For more than 2
years, a bipartisan group of experts from the K-12 education,
research, policymaking, and business sectors, held meetings across
the state and spoke with numerous stakeholders, policymakers, and
researchers from California and throughout the nation to learn from
their ideas and experience. The Committee ultimately produced a
report that provided specific recommendations in inter-related
issue areas.
In order to hold policymakers accountable to the goals set forth by
the Task Force, one would assume that the Task Force or another
entity should administer the implementation and evaluate the
outcomes, which at the very least would be a 10 year commitment.
Consequently, consideration should be given to possibly designating
a state entity responsible for realizing the vision of the Task
Force to dramatically reduce California's poverty rate.
6.Prior Related or Similar Legislation. AB 56 (Ma) of 2007/2008,
called for the creation a cabinet-level position of "Secretary to
End Poverty in California". The Secretary would have reviewed the
work of the state agencies, departments, and offices that implement
and administer antipoverty programs in the state to determine
whether those agencies, departments, and offices are operating in
the most efficient and effective manner possible. The Secretary
would have reported the findings to Assembly and Senate Human
Services Committees and the Governor. This bill would have also
required the Secretary to regularly report to the Legislature
regarding any pending bills that may have impacted programs for the
working poor in the state. This bill was held in Assembly
Appropriations.
AB 1118 (Jones) of 2007/2008, would have established the California
Child Poverty Council, an advisory body responsible for developing
a comprehensive plan to reduce child poverty in California by 50%
by January 1, 2017, and eliminate it by January 1, 2027. The bill
would have designated the composition of the Council, including as
chair, the Secretary of California Health and Human Services. The
bill would have required the Council to monitor and report at least
annually to the Governor, the Legislature, and the public the
extent to which the state is meeting the numerical targets for
reducing child poverty. This bill was held in Assembly
Appropriations.
AB 2556 (Jones) of 2005/2006 would have declared a goal of the
SB 1084
Page 10
Legislature to reduce child poverty by one-half by January 1, 2016,
and to eliminate it entirely by January 1, 2026. This bill would
have required the Department of Finance, in conjunction with the
release of the Governor's Budget proposal, to report to the
Legislature on how the Governor's Budget proposal will impact the
state's goal of reducing child poverty. In addition, this bill
would have required the Legislative Analyst to include an analysis
of this report on reducing child poverty, in the analysis of the
annual Governor's budget proposal. The Governor vetoed the bill
and stated in his veto message that, "it does not provide solutions
to end child poverty, but rather is a policy statement more
appropriately made in a resolution and considered through annual
budget hearings."
7.Arguments in Support. According to one of the sponsors, Insight
Center for Community Economic Development , "the combined effects of
the recession, high unemployment, and the state budget crisis have
increased economic insecurity among Californians to 31% in recent
years?.Poverty threatens the state's economic health by reducing our
tax base, decreasing the educated workforce, and increasing costs
for health care, criminal justice, and social service programs. The
diverse membership of the California Economic Security Task Force
would work together to identify what we are currently doing to
reduce poverty and increase economic security, and to develop a
comprehensive, unified strategy for increasing economic security
among Californians. Now, more than ever, we need to be smart about
how we tackle poverty and increase economic security for
California's families. By working together and using our limited
resources wisely, we can continue to be a state of prosperity,
growth, and opportunity."
Another sponsor, Western Center on Law and Poverty , assures that
they are working closely with the Authors and other co-sponsors to
identify funding from philanthropic and private sources, and that SB
1084 does not ask for any money from the General fund or any state
source.
8.Author's Amendments. The Author is offering amendments to the bill
in committee to clarify the makeup of the Task Force. The amendments
will: (Mockup of bill in binder)
a) Change the Task Force membership from 25 to 17 members or
their designees.
b) Specify that the Senate Rules Committee appoints two
members.
SB 1084
Page 11
c) Specify that the Speaker of the Assembly appoints two
members.
d) Removes the Director of the California Department of Aging
or their designee as a member of the Task Force.
e) Removes the Director of Housing and Community Development
or their designee as a member of the Task Force.
f) Removes the Director of Mental Health or their designee as
a member of the Task Force.
g) Removes the State Public Health Officer or their designee
as a member of the Task Force.
h) Removes the Director of Social Services or their designee
as a member of the Task Force.
i) Specifies that a representative of the County Welfare
Directors Association will be a member of the Task Force.
j) Clarifies that the Governor will appoint five individuals
to the Task Force who represent non-government stakeholders
that provide benefits, services, or advocacy to those living in
poverty.
aa) Claries that the Governor will appoint three rather than
five individuals to the Task Force, who live in poverty from
each from one of following areas: rural, suburban, and urban
bb) Clarifies that the Task Force will hold its first meeting
no later than July 1, 2011.
cc) Deletes the requirement that the Task Force is supported
in its work by legislative staff.
NOTE : Double-referral to Rules Committee (second.)
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
County Welfare Directors Association of California (Co-Sponsor)
Insight Center for Community Economic Development, (Co-Sponsor)
Western Center on Law and Poverty (Co-Sponsor)
Women's Foundation of California (Co-Sponsor)
Aging Services of California
Butte County Department of Employment and Social Services
California/Nevada Community Action Partnership
California Partnership
California State Association of Counties (CSAC)
Center on Policy Initiatives
SB 1084
Page 12
Chair of Contra County Board of Supervisors, John Gioia
Children's Defense Fund
Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County
Community Coalition
Congress of California Seniors
Food Bank Coalition of San Luis Obispo County
Fremont Family Resource Center
Jewish Family Service
La Hermanadad Hank Lacayo Youth and Family Center
MomsRising.org
National Senior Citizens Law Center (NSCLC)
Parent Voices
St. Mary's Center
San Luis Obispo County Department of Social Services
Santa Barbara County Department of Social Services
Santa Barbara Women's Political Committee
Senior Community Centers of San Diego
United Way of the Bay Area
Wider Opportunities for Women (WOW)
Women at Work
Women's Initiative
Opposition: (None on file as of March 15, 2010.)
Consultant:Antoinnae Comeaux