BILL ANALYSIS
SB 190
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 27, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Alberto Torrico, Chairman
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 CSU
trustees appointed to advise and assist the CSU administration
SB 190
Page 2
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.
1)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 disclosure and rationale
for each compensation package, and requires the UC Board of
Regents to afford members of the public opportunity to comment.
SB 190
Page 3
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 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.
SB 190
Page 4
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.
2)CSU: Chancellor, vice chancellor, president of an individual
campus, treasurer or assistant treasurer, general counsel,
Trustees' secretary.
SB 190
Page 5
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.
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 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
(AFSCME), AFL-CIO
SB 190
Page 6
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME), Local 3299
Associated Students of the University of California, Davis
California Faculty Association
California Family Council
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
California Newspaper Publishers Association
California Nurses Association
California State Employees Association
California State Student Association
California Teachers Association
Californians Aware (CalAware)
CSU Employees Union/SEIU 2579
Levy, Ram & Olsen LLP
San Francisco Labor Council
State Employee's Trades Council
The Council of UC Faculty Associations
The Greenlining Institute
The Services Employees International Union (SEIU)
University of California Student Association
University Professional and Technical Employees Communications
Workers of America Local 9119
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Eric Johnson / G. O. / (916) 319-2531