BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1998
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 18, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
AB 1998 (Achadjian) - As Amended: April 12, 2012
SUBJECT : County surplus property.
SUMMARY : Authorizes the board of supervisors to authorize
county welfare directors to donate surplus computer equipment
directly to persons receiving specified public benefits.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes the board of supervisors of a county to authorize
the county welfare department to donate surplus computer
equipment directly to persons receiving public benefits under
one or more of the following programs: CalFresh; California
Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Act (CalWORKs);
County Relief, General Relief, or General Assistance; or
Medi-Cal.
2)Requires the board to make findings and declarations relating
to the public purpose served by the donation.
3)Requires the board to develop terms and conditions to govern
any donations made pursuant to this measure.
EXISTING LAW authorizes the board of supervisors of a county to
donate or lease any real or personal property that the board
declares to be surplus to a school or community college
district, a county children and families commission, or an
organization exempt from taxation pursuant to specified
provisions of federal law.
FISCAL EFFECT : None. This bill is keyed non-fiscal.
COMMENTS :
1)This bill would authorize county boards of supervisors to
authorize county welfare departments to donate surplus
computer equipment directly to individuals already receiving
public benefits. The bill is sponsored by the County of Santa
Barbara.
2)The sponsor, Santa Barbara County, estimates that it surpluses
AB 1998
Page 2
up to 100 computers per year from the Department of Social
Services (DSS), although it would "expect no more than half of
those (50) would go to DSS clients. Some would still go to
other county departments." The surplus equipment would be
depreciated computers from the county's CalWorks, CalFresh,
and MediCal programs that have been "officially and legally
surplused under Federal and State rules, as required in the
Government Code." According to the author, the current
process for declaring property surplus is established by each
board of supervisors.
The pool of individuals receiving CalWorks, CalFresh, and
MediCal benefits and therefore eligible to receive surplus
computer equipment under this bill is estimated to be
approximately 20,000 families.
3)According to the author, this bill would "allow a Board of
Supervisors to locally opt-in to amend their surplus property
plan to include the ability to donate surplus computer
property directly to Ýpublic assistance] recipients. Current
Government ÝC]ode does not provide the flexibility needed to
get surplus computers and computer equipment quickly into the
hands of needy low-income recipients of public
assistance?without the utilization of pass through agencies.
AB 1998 would streamline the donation process by allowing
direct donation of surplus computer equipment to low-income
households. This would help these individuals gain access to
the type of computer technology necessary to meet the
conditions of receiving aid and give recipients better access
to online employment training and job search information."
4)According to the sponsor, counties should have the authority
to donate directly to individuals rather than work through
non-profit groups because: "Ýs]ome counties don't have a
non-profit with the capability of conducting this type of
distribution process. This is a true inefficiency for social
service departments as ÝFederal Government agencies] continue
to push electronic access by clients in our benefit programs."
Furthermore, "Ýi]n some counties, non-profits do not want to
engage in this process. And in some situations, the
non-profit attempts to benefit from this arrangement in such a
way as to make it unbeneficial to the county to pursue it."
Additionally, using non-profits for donations can be costly:
"current law which requires going through non-profits has a
AB 1998
Page 3
local cost attached to develop contracts and arrangements with
non-profits, conduct inventories, and conduct fiscal
monitoring. Our proposal 'cuts the middle man out' of the
process and allows us, with a Board approved process, to deal
directly with our clients with whom we already have regular
contact. Current law still allows the involvement of
non-profits if that is already working well in an individual
county. Our proposal is simply an additional option which
some counties will find very beneficial as they move toward
more 'remote access' as a business model, ultimately reducing
administrative expenses since clients will be able to access
social services on-line, without making multiple visits to our
offices."
The sponsor also contends that the authority to donate surplus
computer equipment directly to needy families is better for
counties than trying to sell it because "then the state would
have to set up an additional fund that would have to be
audited etc. Direct donation would be much more effective and
efficient in getting the computers to the individuals who need
them."
Finally, the author points out the permissive nature of the
bill and the possibility of routing donations to both
non-profits and individuals: "Non-profits are by no means
excludedÝ.] I expect in our county that we will split the
available equipment and still give some to a non-profit, but
benefit program clients will now be able to obtain equipment
that has not been previously available to them."
Nevertheless, by giving surplus computers directly to
individuals, the county would lose the opportunity to work
with the local non-profit or educational sectors to put the
equipment to a more public use, like making terminals
available in a school, library, or community employment
center.
The Committee may wish to consider whether or not the private
use of surplus public property is the best means to achieve
the larger public purpose of increasing employment among
public assistance recipients.
5)The Legislature considered two similar surplus property bills
during the 2001-02 Session.
AB 1998
Page 4
AB 314 (Chan), Chapter 18, Statutes of 2001, authorized the
board of supervisors to donate or lease any real or personal
property that the board declares to be surplus to a school or
community college district, a county children and families
commission, or a nonprofit corporation organized for the care,
teaching, or training of children, developmentally disabled
children, or Native Americans. The bill received unanimous
support in the Assembly Local Government committee (11-0), as
well as on the Assembly floor (77-0).
SB 1815 (Chesbro), Chapter 97, Statutes of 2002, added
tax-exempt organizations that provide health or human services
to the list of organizations to which counties may donate or
lease surplus property. The bill received unanimous support
in the Assembly Local Government Committee (11-0) on consent,
as well as on the Assembly floor (72-0).
6)Support arguments : According to the author, this bill would
empower counties to donate surplus computer property directly
to public assistance recipients, allowing the county
streamline the donation process, save time and money, and
enable low-income individuals to better utilize computer
technology to increase their employment opportunities.
Opposition arguments : This bill would allow counties to give
public property directly to individuals without clear
accountability. By failing to properly utilize the experience
and connections of the non-profit sector, surplus property
will likely go to a personal use rather than a broader public
use, resulting in reduced access and a duplication of effort.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
County of Santa Barbara ÝSPONSOR]
California State Association of Counties
County Welfare Directors' Association of California
Regional Council of Rural Counties
Urban Counties Caucus
Opposition
None on file
AB 1998
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by : Hank Dempsey / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958