BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 425
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 14, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 425 (DeSaulnier) - As Amended: May 7, 2013
Policy Committee:
AccountabilityVote:10-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes public agencies to establish peer review
groups to provide scientific and technical advice on public
works projects administered by the agencies. Specifically, this
bill: requires a public agency, when exercising the above
authority, to:
1)Develop a transparent process for selecting peer group
members.
2)Draft a charter, to be posted on the agency's website, to
include specified information, including:
a) The group's objective and scope of activities and the
description of the group's duties.
b) The estimated number of group meetings and annual
operating costs.
c) A statement declaring whether the members have signed a
conflict of interest disclosure form identifying any real
or perceived conflicts between a member and the specific
public works project.
FISCAL EFFECT
To the extent a state or local agency exercises the authority to
establish a peer review group, any associated costs would
presumably be absorbed either within the agency's administrative
budget or within the budget for public works project under
review. No costs to local agencies would be state reimbursable.
COMMENTS
SB 425
Page 2
1)Purpose . According to the author, "large public works projects
can take on monumental importance and even proceed against
better judgment if logical concerns are ignored for the
potential 'greater good' the project may promise. In the
project selection process, policymakers must rely on experts
to evaluate a project's costs and benefits; these experts can
make varying assumptions in order to reach a variety of
conclusions. Legitimate peer review is a cornerstone of the
scientific method and a key tool for policymakers to use to
validate conclusions presented by these experts."
This bill is intended to legitimize the use of peer review by
requiring administering agencies in the state using a peer
review group to develop a transparent process for selecting
members as well as draft and post online a charter for the
group describing its members, the scope of its activities, its
operating costs, and its objectives, among other things.
2)Opposition . The Department of Finance believes that previously
established peer review groups would also be subject to the
bill's provisions, leading to the possibility of local
agencies filing a state-reimbursable mandate claim.
Staff believes this is an incorrect interpretation, as bill
requirements include activities to be accomplished prior to
the establishment of such a group.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081