BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1501
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 13, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 1501 (V. Manuel Perez) - As Introduced: February 27, 2009
Policy Committee: Business and
Professions Vote: 9 - 0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires that the salaries of board or commission
members making over $100,000 per year be prorated to actual
hours worked in any given month where the board member does not
work full time. Specifically, this bill:
1)Defines "board member" as a member of a board, commission,
committee, or similarly constituted body created by executive
order or statute.
2)States that the prorating of salary does not apply to board
members who are making less than $100,000 per year on or after
January 1, 2010.
3)Requires that the salary of a board member must be prorated in
any given month that the board member does not work full time.
4)Requires the Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) to
determine which activities constitute service as a board
member and the minimum number of hours required to deem a
board member as serving full time, which shall be no less than
160 hours per month.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Initial workload associated with DPA determining which
activities constitute service to the board and the actual
hours worked by board members each month would likely cost in
excess of $300,000.
2)Unknown, potential savings in the hundreds of thousands of
AB 1501
Page 2
dollars associated with prorating the salaries of board
members who are working less than full time in any given
month.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . According to the author's office while many boards
and commissions play important roles in California's state
government, there are boards and commissions that provide a
salary compensation of $100,000 a year or more contingent upon
the member's attendance at a few meetings. The author notes
that, according to the California Performance Review Report
there are 17 boards and commissions whose members are the
highest paid in California; their salaries cost the state more
than $9 million per year.
The author states, "While the cost of California's boards and
commissions is of concern, it is more important that
appointees be held accountable for their responsibilities to
serve the public. It is the intent of AB 1501 to ensure that
board members who earn $100,000 or more a year are following
through with their duties."
2)Background . According to information provided by the author's
office, the following boards currently have at least one
member with a salary in excess of $100,000:
Agricultural Labor Relations Board
Air Resources Board
Energy Resource Conservation and Development Committee
Fair Political Practices Commission
Gambling Control Commission
Integrated Waste Management Board
Occupational Safety & Health Appeals Board
Board of Prison Hearings
Public Employment Relations Board
Public Utilities Commission
Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board
Water Resources Control Board
Worker's Compensation Appeals Board
3)Related Legislation . AB 579 (Huber) eliminates the current
salary authority for paid state boards and commissions and
establishes new requirements for setting the salaries for
boards and commissions. That bill is currently on the suspense
AB 1501
Page 3
file in this committee.
AB 2539 (Strickland) of 2008 prohibits a member of a state
board or commission from receiving any salary in 2007 or
later, if the position of the member on the state board or
commission received or would receive a salary totaling at
least $100,000 per year, and the members of the state board or
commission are required to meet 2 or less times per month. AB
2539 died in the Assembly Business and Professions Committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916)
319-2081