BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 85 (Wilk) - Open meetings
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: April 15, 2015 |Policy Vote: G.O. 13 - 0 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: Yes |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 17, 2015 |Consultant: Mark McKenzie |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 85, an urgency measure, would require specified
state body advisory committees comprised of fewer than three
members to comply with the provisions of the Bagley-Keene Open
Meeting Act if at least one member of the advisory committee is
also a member of the larger state body and the advisory
committee is supported by the state body's funds.
Fiscal
Impact:
In general, this bill would impose minor to moderate costs
on affected state entities. Some state entities may simply
decide to eliminate certain advisory bodies and specified
standing committees rather than spend limited resources for
compliance with open meeting requirements.
The following regulatory entities within the Department of
Consumer Affairs (DCA) that use advisory committees of less
AB 85 (Wilk) Page 1 of
?
than three members reported costs to comply with open
meeting requirements, including costs for board member and
staff travel, communications, and providing public meeting
space:
o Board of Barbering and Cosmetology: $14,000
(Barbering and Cosmetology Contingency Fund)
o Board of Optometry: $6,000 (State Optometry Fund)
o Board of Chiropractic Examiners: $99,000 (State
Board of Chiropractic Examiners Fund)
o Acupuncture Board: $65,000 (Acupuncture Fund)
o Respiratory Care Board: $70,000 (Respiratory Care
Fund)
o Physician Assistant Board: $14,000 (Physician
Assistant Fund)
o Dental Board: $27,500 (State Dentistry Fund)
o Dental Hygiene Committee: $18,000 (State Dental
Hygiene Fund)
o Naturopathic Medicine Committee: $11,500
(Naturopathic Doctor's Fund)
o Board of Registered Nursing: $28,000 (Board of
Registered Nursing Fund)
o Board of Accountancy: $119,000 (Accountancy Fund)
o Board of Pharmacy: $9,500 (Pharmacy Board
Contingency Fund)
o Board of Psychology: $31,000 (Psychology Fund)
o State Athletic Commission: $125,000 (Athletic
Commission Fund)
o Osteopathic Medical Board: projected costs of
$82,000, based on historical use of advisory bodies, if
advisory bodies are formed in the future. (Osteopathic
Medical Board Contingency Fund)
Background: Existing law defines an advisory board, commission, committee,
and subcommittee of a state body that is comprised of three or
more persons and created by a formal action of the body as a
"state body" for purposes of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
This generally requires state agencies, boards, and commissions
to publicly notice meetings, prepare formal agendas, accept
public testimony, and conduct meetings in public, unless
specifically authorized to meet in closed session.
Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, governs meetings of
AB 85 (Wilk) Page 2 of
?
legislative bodies of local agencies. In general, the Brown and
Bagley-Keene Acts are virtually identical. While both acts
contain specific exceptions from the open meeting requirements
where government has demonstrated a need for confidentiality,
such exceptions have been narrowly construed by the courts.
Until 1993, both Acts contained very similar definitions for the
public bodies that are subject to the open meeting requirements.
However, the definition of "state body" in the Bagley-Keene Act
currently exempts advisory bodies created by a formal action of
the board that are comprised of fewer than three individuals
from the definition of "state body" which authorizes them to
meet without public notice.
Proposed Law:
AB 85 would require two-member advisory boards, commissions,
committees, subcommittees, or other bodies created by formal
action of a state body, to comply with the provisions of the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act if at least one member of the
advisory committee is also a member of the larger state body and
the advisory committee is supported by the body's funds. AB 85
is an urgency measure.
Related
Legislation: AB 2058 (Wilk), which was vetoed by the Governor
in 2014, specified that a standing committee of a state body,
irrespective of its composition, that has a continuing subject
matter jurisdiction or fixed meeting schedule is a state body
for purposes of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act. Governor
Brown's veto message stated the following:
Any meeting involving formal action by a state body should
be open to the public. An advisory committee, however, does
not have authority to act on its own and must present any
findings and recommendations to a larger body in a public
setting for formal action. That should be sufficient.
Staff
Comments: This bill is intended to increase transparency and
public participation and oversight of state entities that form
AB 85 (Wilk) Page 3 of
?
certain advisory or policy bodies of fewer than three persons
that are not subject to open meeting requirements. It should be
noted that these advisory bodies are generally formed to
investigate specific issues and advise a full board at public
meetings, but cannot independently take official actions.
The bill would impose increased duties on state entities who
currently have advisory bodies consisting of fewer than three
members related to compliance with the open meeting requirements
of the Bagley-Keene Act, including publicly noticing all
meetings, preparing formal agendas, accepting public testimony,
conducting meetings in public, and recording proceedings. Costs
to individual state entities are likely to be relatively minor,
but cumulatively could reach the hundreds of thousands annually.
It is likely that some state entities would change practices
related to advisory bodies and committees, which may shift costs
to state staff to conduct the advisory work of those bodies.
-- END --