BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
                              Senator Isadore Hall, III
                                        Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:           SB 281           Hearing Date:    4/28/2015
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |Stone                                                |
          |-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
          |Version:   |4/21/2015                                            |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:      |Yes             |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|Felipe Lopez                                         |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          

          SUBJECT: Boards and commissions: salaries.


            DIGEST:    This bill sets an annual salary of $12,000 for  
          nonelected members of various state boards and commissions  
          appointed on or after January 1, 2016.

          ANALYSIS:
          
          Existing law establishes the annual salary of the members of the  
          Agricultural Labor Relations Board, the State Energy Resources  
          Conservation and Development Commission, the Public Employment  
          Relations Board, the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, the  
          Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, the State Water Resources  
          Control Board, the Board of Parole Hearings, the Occupational  
          Safety and Health Appeals Board, the Alcoholic Beverage Control  
          Appeals Board, the State Personnel Board, the State Air  
          Resources Board, and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board. 

          This bill:

          1)Sets an annual salary of $12,000 for nonelected members of the  
            Agricultural Labor Relations Board, the State Energy Resources  
            Conservation and Development Commission, the Public Employment  
            Relations Board, the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, the  
            Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, the State Water Resources  
            Control Board, the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals  
            Board, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board, the State  
            Personnel Board, the State Air Resources Board, and the  







          SB 281 (Stone)                                      Page 2 of ?
          
          
            Central Valley Flood Protection Board.

          2)Exempts non-elected members of the Public Utilities  
            Commission, the Board of Parole Hearings and the Fair  
            Political Practices Commission.

          3)Provides that the annual salary of $12,000 applies to board  
            and commission members appointed after January 1, 2016. 

          Background

          Purpose of the bill:  According to the author, with our budget  
          facing uncertainty in the coming years and students in our  
          University of California system facing tuition hikes, it seems  
          tone-deaf to offer six figure salaries to members of several  
          boards and commissions in California.  The author further  
          contends that most of the members of these boards and  
          commissions are doing a great service to the people of  
          California, but people who serve in these largely part-time  
          posts should treat their appointments as public service instead  
          of full time patronage positions.  The author concludes that  
          California must send a signal that our limited tax dollars  
          should be directed towards the most needy and most vulnerable,  
          not on six figure salaries to sit on a state board. 

          Current salaries:  Below are salary ranges for members of the  
          boards and commissions to which this bill applies.  Some of  
          these salaries were obtained through public information  
          available on the State Controller's Government Compensation in  
          California Web site.  It is important to note that these numbers  
          are based on salaries for 2013.  Some of these salaries were  
          also obtained through the Sacramento Bee's State Worker Salary  
          Database. 

          Agricultural Labor Relations Board: $119,128 - $134,431
          State Energy Resources Commission: $125,529 - $127,082
          Public Employees Relations Board: $122,638 - $127,638
          Unemployment Insurance appeals Board: $103,000 - $133,000
          Workers' Compensation Appeals Board: $133,000 - $134,000
          State Water Resources Control Board: $93,332 - $126,551
          Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board: $116,000 -$118,000
          Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board: $15,300 - $24,311
          State Personnel Board: $41,475 - $41,941
          State Air Resources Board: $39,867 - $41,941
          Central Valley Flood Protection Board: $40,236 - $41,941








          SB 281 (Stone)                                      Page 3 of ?
          
          

          Prior/Related Legislation
          
          SB 153 (Strickland), 2011-2012 Legislative Session.  The bill  
          would have prohibited members from various boards and  
          commissions from receiving a salary and would have instead  
          authorized for members of these various boards and commissions  
          to receive $100 per diem.  (Failed Passage in Senate  
          Governmental Organization Committee)

          SB 1368 (Anderson) 2011-2012 Legislative Session.  The bill  
          would have limited the salaries of state officers and employees,  
          including overtime, to no more than the salary received by the  
          Governor, and would have recommended that the University of  
          California also limit salaries for officers and employees to no  
          more than the salary received by the Governor.  (Failed passage  
          in Senate Governmental Organization Committee)

          SB 685 (Strickland), 2009-2010 Legislative Session.  The bill  
          would have prohibited members from various boards and  
          commissions from receiving a salary and would have instead  
          authorized for members of these various boards and commissions  
          to receive $100 per diem.  (Failed Passage in Senate  
          Governmental Organization Committee)

          FISCAL EFFECT:                 Appropriation:  No    Fiscal  
          Com.:             Yes          Local:          No


            SUPPORT:  

          Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

          OPPOSITION:

          Glendale City Employees Association
          Organization of SMUD Employees
          San Bernardino Public Employees Association
          San Luis Obispo County Employees Association
          Santa Rosa City Employees Association

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:    According to the Howard Jarvis  
          Taxpayers Association, regardless of whether these salaries are  
          paid for out of general or special funds, the issue is restoring  
          the public trust and ensuring that taxpayer dollars are well  








          SB 281 (Stone)                                      Page 4 of ?
          
          
          spent.  They further argue that while some of these boards and  
          commissions exist for legitimate purposes, others perform  
          functions that could be performed by existing administrative  
          agencies.  They conclude that while limiting salaries to $12,000  
          will not end all criticism, it certainly will address the  
          perception by the voting public and taxpayers that these offices  
          are little more than parking places for termed out legislators. 

          ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:    Opponents of the bill are  
          particularly concerned about the impact that this bill would  
          have on the compensation of members of the Public Employment  
          Relations Board (PERB).  They argue that while the PERB only  
          meets formally once a month, the Board members work full time to  
          administer the collective bargaining statutes covering employees  
          of California's public schools, colleges, and universities,  
          employees of the State of California, employees of California  
          local public agencies (cities, counties, and special districts),  
          trial court employees and supervisory employees of the Los  
          Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.  They  
          argue that the impact of leaving the administrative and  
          adjudicatory responsibilities of the PERB unfinished could be  
          far reaching and have significant negative impacts on local and  
          state government, the unions that represent the employees, and  
          the individual employees who are authorized to file their own  
          unfair labor practice charges.  Opponents conclude by stating  
          that the relatively miniscule state savings cannot be justified  
          in severely restricting the salaries of PERB board members who  
          have a charge to protect workers.