BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1344
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 18, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1344 (Feuer) - As Amended: May 10, 2011
Policy Committee: Elections and
Reapportionment Vote: 6-0
Local Government 7-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill amends the requirements for awarding salary increases
for excluded employees and for adopting a city charter proposal
or amendments to a city charter to be submitted to the voters
for approval or rejection at an established statewide general
election date, among other provisions. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires a city charter or amendments to a city charter
proposed by a charter commission to be submitted to the voters
at an established statewide general election date.
2)Authorizes the governing body of a city to submit a charter
proposal, amendments to a charter, repeal of a charter, or
recodification of a charter, whether proposed by the governing
body or by petition, to the voters for adoption at the next
established statewide general election date provided there are
at least 88 days before the election, and requires a proposal
include in the ballot description an enumeration of new city
powers that would result.
3)Prohibits, on or after January 2, 2012, any contract executed
or renewed between a local government and an excluded employee
from including an automatic increase in compensation and a
maximum cash settlement that exceeds the amounts provided for
in statutory provisions governing employment contracts.
4)Requires a local agency, before increasing the compensation of
an excluded employee, to complete a performance review of the
excluded employee.
AB 1344
Page 2
5)Requires an employee or officer of a local agency who is
convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his or her office
or position to pay restitution to the local agency that
expended public funds for the legal defense of that officer or
employee.
FISCAL EFFECT
This bill will result in reimbursable mandated local costs,
evaluating and awarding raises to excluded employees. The size
of an individual mandate claim will probably not be large, and
many jurisdictions will not have a valid claim. However, there
are almost 500 cities, 58 counties and 4000 special districts.
If only 20 percent have a claim of $500, the total reimbursable
costs of the bill would be approximately $450,000.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose. According to the author, the scandal surrounding the
City of Bell in 2010 exposed deficiencies in existing law that
must be addressed to ensure greater transparency and to assure
voters that taxpayer dollars are being used wisely. AB 1344,
the author says, targets practices exploited by some local
governments that inappropriately rewarded elected officials
and top executive officers outside of public view. Requiring
basic good governance measures as they relate to compensation
practices and provides, to the maximum extent possible, the
public an opportunity to be informed and comment on local
compensation-setting practices.
2)Background . The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act governs local
governments' relations with their employees and portions of
the Education Code govern school districts and community
college districts' employee relations. These collective
bargaining and representation procedures generally do not
apply to executive employees - county administrators, city
managers, special district managers, school superintendents,
community college presidents - who are employed by, and report
directly to, local elected governing boards.
3)City of Bell . Last September, eight current and former Bell
city officials, including four of the five sitting city
council members at the time, were arrested and charged with
AB 1344
Page 3
multiple counts of misappropriating public funds and
defrauding taxpayers of roughly $5.5 million. Several news
reports that came out during that time exposed conduct by the
city council that, though sometimes in compliance with state
law, inappropriately compensated councilmembers and city
officials. The City of Bell used the authority granted under
current law to quickly pass a charter that granted them the
ability to govern their own municipal affairs. This bill,
according to the author, will revise provisions in current law
that allowed the council members to use their positions and
authority for personal gain.
4) City of Bell charter election. According to media
reports, the City of Bell seemingly intentionally scheduled
their election for its charter proposal on a date not
likely to garner much participation from voters. The
special municipal election called for the purposes of
voting on the charter happened on November 29, 2005 - just
5 days after Thanksgiving. It was the only item on the
ballot, and was promoted by city officials as a change that
would give the city more local control. The ballot
language included no mention of the effect the change would
have on council members' salaries. Fewer than 400 voters
turned out in the city of over 36,000 residents.
5) There is no registered opposition to this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081