BILL ANALYSIS
SB 190
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 19, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Anthony Portantino, Chair
SB 190 (Yee) - As Amended: May 22, 2007
SENATE VOTE : 39-0
SUBJECT : Public postsecondary education: meetings: Higher
Education Governance Accountability Act
SUMMARY : Modifies current law governing the meetings of the
Board of Regents of the University of California (UC) and the
California State University (CSU) Board of Trustees and
clarifies the requirements for meetings that must be open and
public. Specifically, this bill :
1)Places the following requirements on the CSU:
a) Requires all meetings of the CSU Board of Trustees and
its standing and special committees or subcommittees to be
subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act
(Bagley-Keene).
b) Requires advisory groups, study groups, or task forces
(excluding search and selection committees and advisory
groups whose purpose is to recruit executives for the CSU)
that meet the following criteria to be subject to
Bagley-Keene:
i) Advise the CSU Board of Trustees or the office of
the CSU Chancellor;
ii) Include one or more CSU trustees other than
ex-officio members of the Board of Trustees;
iii) Have continuing subject-matter jurisdiction or have
a regular meeting schedule; and
iv) Are created by the CSU Board of Trustees or an
individual CSU trustee; one of its standing committees,
special committees, or subcommittees; or the office of
the CSU Chancellor.
c) Excludes from these provisions groups of three or fewer
SB 190
Page 2
CSU trustees appointed to advise and assist the CSU
administration in contract negotiations.
d) Requires action taken by a committee of or the full CSU
Board of Trustees on executive compensation proposals for
specified executive positions to occur in open session,
requires full disclosure and rationale for each
compensation package, and requires the CSU Board of
Trustees to afford members of the public opportunity to
comment.
e) Requires discussions of and action on executive
compensation programs and policies to occur in open session
of the CSU Board of Trustees.
f) Defines compensation to include salary, benefits,
perquisites, severance payments, retirement benefits, or
any other form of compensation.
2)Places the following requirements on the UC:
a) Requires advisory groups, study groups, or task forces
(excluding search and selection committees and advisory
groups whose purpose is to recruit executives for the UC)
that meet the following criteria to be subject to
Bagley-Keene:
i) Advise the UC Regents or the office of the UC
President;
ii) Include one or more UC Regents other than ex-officio
members of the Board of Regents;
iii) Have continuing subject-matter jurisdiction or have
a regular meeting schedule; and
iv) Are created by the UC Board of Regents or an
individual UC Regent; one of its standing committees,
special committee or subcommittees; or the office of the
UC President.
b) Requires action taken by a committee of the UC Regents
and final action by the full UC Board of Regents on
executive compensation proposals for specified executive
positions to occur in open session, requires full
SB 190
Page 3
disclosure and rationale for each compensation package, and
requires the UC Board of Regents to afford members of the
public opportunity to comment.
c) Requires discussions of and action on executive
compensation programs and policies to occur in open session
of the UC Board of Regents.
d) Defines compensation to include salary, benefits,
perquisites, severance payments, retirement benefits, or
any other form of compensation.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires meetings of state bodies, including the CSU, to be
open and public (Bagley-Keene, Government Code Sec. 11120).
2)Requires all meetings of the UC Regents and its standing and
special committees or subcommittees to be subject to
Bagley-Keene (Education Code Sec. 92020) and provides
exceptions for specified situations.
3)Requires an advisory body, advisory commission, advisory
committee, advisory subcommittee, or similar multimember
advisory body of a state body to comply with Bagley-Keene
[Government Code Sec. 11121(b)], if created by a formal action
of the state body or of any member of the state body, and if
the advisory body consists of three or more persons.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee
analysis, this bill would result in costs to UC and CSU of
$35,000 each per year to comply with the open meeting noticing
requirements. However, CSU estimates costs of $100,000 to
$200,000 annually.
COMMENTS : Background : Bagley-Keene requires meetings of state
bodies, including the CSU, to be open and public and requires
state bodies to publish a specific agenda and notice of each
meeting at least 10 days in advance of the meeting. Under
Bagley-Keene, a congregation of a majority of members of a state
body at the same time and place to hear, discuss, or deliberate
upon any item that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of
the body constitutes a meeting that must be open and noticed.
Bagley-Keene requires meetings of advisory committees to be open
SB 190
Page 4
and noticed only if the committees consist of three or more
persons and are created by formal action of the body or any
member of the body.
Existing law requires all meetings of the UC Regents and its
standing and special committees or subcommittees to be subject
to Bagley-Keene. However, the UC Regents are authorized to hold
special meetings and to meet in closed session to consider or
discuss specified matters including matters of national
security, gifts and bequests, and the acquisition or disposition
of property. Current law also authorizes the UC Regents to
discuss in closed session matters concerning the appointment,
employment, performance, compensation, or dismissal of
university employees; however, final actions on compensation
proposals of principal officers of the UC or the UC Board of
Regents must be made in open session.
In response to media reports concerning the compensation of
executives at the UC, the Senate Education Committee held two
informational hearings in 2006 on executive compensation
practices of the UC. A UC-appointed task force report and
independent audit provided additional information regarding UC
compensation practices and policies. On March 21, 2007, the
Senate Education Committee held a follow-up informational
hearing on this same topic for both the UC and the CSU.
Stated need for this bill : According to the author, existing
law does not specify that the CSU Board of Trustees and its
subcommittees must conduct actions on executive compensation in
open session. Nor does existing law require full disclosure of
the compensation package and rationale for such compensation.
The author also seeks to require advisory committees that are
currently not subject to Bagley-Keene to conduct their meetings
in open session.
Recruitment and retention in context : This bill would require
the discussion and final action of any executive compensation
program or policy be conducted in open session. It would also
require all committee and subcommittee action on executive
compensation packages be conducted in open session for the
following positions:
1)UC: President, vice president, chancellor of an individual
campus, treasurer or assistant treasurer, general counsel,
Regents' secretary.
SB 190
Page 5
2)CSU: Chancellor, vice chancellor, president of an individual
campus, treasurer or assistant treasurer, general counsel,
Trustees' secretary.
Both UC and CSU compete with other research and teaching
institutions for top academic executives. Competitive
compensation packages are necessary to attract and retain
talented scholars and administrators. While this bill will
result in greater disclosure of compensation packages, it will
not necessarily provide meaningful information to enable the
public to fairly evaluate compensation proposals.
Open and public meetings of advisory groups : The author's
office contends that the intent of this
provision is to prevent the CSU and UC from using advisory
committees that include CSU trustees or UC regents to discuss
matters that should be discussed in public meetings by the
governing body. By requiring advisory groups created by the
office of the CSU Chancellor or UC President and that includes
at least one trustee/regent to be subject to Bagley-Keene, this
bill appears to hold the CSU and UC to a higher open meeting
standard than is required of other state bodies. Would such a
requirement set a precedent for other state bodies?
Advisory committees provide information to executive office
staff enabling them to develop recommendations on a variety of
policy matters that are later brought to the Trustees or Regents
for discussion in a public meeting. The UC has identified 11
advisory bodies that would be impacted by this bill, including a
task force on university funding options and a health services
advisory group. The CSU has identified four such bodies. Both
university systems would incur increased costs associated with
notices, published agendas, minutes, arranging for facilities
compliant with the American Disability Act, etc., for meetings
of such committees. Further, the CSU is concerned that these new
requirements will discourage trustee participation in advisory
groups, leaving them potentially less informed. The UC has
suggested that this measure apply only to executive
compensation-related advisory committees, since this bill is
focused on executive compensation disclosure.
Previous Legislation : This bill is similar to AB 775 (Yee) of
2006, which applied only to UC and was held by the Senate
Appropriations Committee. AB 775 would have required both
SB 190
Page 6
subcommittee and full board discussions concerning executive
compensation for specified positions to occur in open session.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees,
AFL-CIO (co-sponsor)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees,
Local 3299
Associated Student of UC Davis
California Faculty Association (co-sponsor)
California Family Council
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
California Newspaper Publishers Association
California Nurses Association
California State Employees Association
California Teachers Association
Californians Aware
Council of UC Faculty Associations
CSU Employees Union, SEIU 2579
Karl Olsen, Levy, Ram & Olsen Attorneys
San Francisco Labor Council, AFL-CIO
Service Employees International Union
State Employees Trade Council
The Greenlining Institute
University of California Student Association
University Professional and Technical Employees/Communications
Workers of America, Local 9119
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Sandra Fried / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960