BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1518
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 12, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
Mary Hayashi, Chair
AB 1518 (Anderson) - As Amended: May 11, 2009
SUBJECT : State government: boards, commissions, committees:
repeal.
SUMMARY : Requires that all statutorily created state boards,
commissions, and committees that have not met or had a quorum at
any of their regular meetings since January 1, 2008, be repealed
on January 1, 2010, with certain exceptions. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Requires all statutorily created state boards, commissions,
and committees that have not met or had a quorum at any of
their regular meetings since January 1, 2008, be repealed on
January 1, 2011.
2)Exempts the above requirement if the agency secretary, under
whose authority the state board, commission, or committee
functions, issues an order that states of which state boards,
commissions, or committees under his or her authority are
actively meeting or have a functioning membership and
transmits that information to the following:
a) The Chief Clerk of the Assembly;
b) The Secretary of State; and,
c) The Chairpersons of the Assembly Committee on Business
and Professions and the Senate Committee on Business,
Professions and Economic Development.
EXISTING LAW establishes various state boards, commissions, and
committees.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
Previous Committee Action . This bill was heard on May 5, 2009,
and was put over for further hearing. The author's office has
amended the bill to exempt state boards, commissions, and
AB 1518
Page 2
committees from abolishment if the agency secretary, under whose
authority the state board, commission, or committee functions,
issues an order stating the board, commission, or committee is
actively meeting or has a functioning membership.
Purpose of the bill . According to the author's office,
"Hundreds of boards, commissions, and committees are on the
books, but no one's kept track of how many there are. It simply
doesn't make sense to keep non-functioning pieces of government
laying around. This is an easy way to start by cleaning up the
codes where there is simply nothing going on, and promotes a
vision of a more efficient and leaner shape of government."
In support of this bill, the author's office quotes directly
from the Little Hoover Commission (LHC), "California, like many
states during the last century, built a government that relied
heavily on boards and commissions to improve government
decision-making. Boards and commissions - if well structured
and managed - can be effective mechanisms for serving the
public. But boards and commissions also are frequently cited as
examples of waste and abuse of government resources. The case
is usually made through examples of bodies that are too
independent - not accountable to the people, to the legislation
that authorizes their activity, to the appointing powers or even
the facts before them. There are some instances where members
are given full-time pay for part-time work. Some boards are too
close to the profession or business they are expected to
regulate. And there are even more boards that are not providing
the advice or oversight that is expected of them."
Background . The author's office selectively excerpts from a LHC
report to support its premise that AB 1518 "is an easy way to
start" to eliminate waste and abuse of government resources
associated with boards and commissions. However, that same LHC
report also calls for careful analysis, planning, and
coordination of reform efforts. The information provided by the
author's office and the provisions of this bill do not provide
any assessment of which entities would potentially be
eliminated, nor how their elimination may affect the operation
of government or the public welfare.
AB1869 (Anderson) of 2008 proposed to eliminate most of the
boards and commissions serving California as initially proposed
in Governor's Schwarzenegger's 2004 California Performance
Review (CPR). The CPR proposed to eliminate 88 state boards and
AB 1518
Page 3
commissions by either abolishing the boards and their functions
entirely or by placing their functions within the executive
branch. Amidst opposition from the public, business, and
consumer protection groups, the Administration dropped this
proposal.
In response to the Governor's CPR proposal, the LHC published
Historic Opportunities: Transforming California State
Government. This report, used as background material by the
author's office, states, "?reforms that seek to reduce
fragmentation through consolidation alone, and do not provide
for coordinating the efforts of the consolidated departments,
will ultimately fail in their goals. In addition, if the only
solution to fragmentation is consolidation, then departments may
become too big to be effective. Thus problem assessment should
explore how organizational structures, the size of departments
and related challenges might complicate efforts to collaborate,
cooperate or coordinate efforts to realize goals."
Further, the LHC report states, "In addition to saving money,
the California Performance Review was attempting in some
instances to streamline decision-making, increase coordination
between related programs, and make programs now governed by
boards more accountable to the Governor. While those are all
noble goals, in many cases boards were intentionally created to
ensure that regulatory decisions were based on facts and
insulated from the political influences of elected officials.
In other cases, boards provide a necessary separation between
conflicting government functions, such as purchasing services
from an industry that the State also regulates.
"At a minimum, situational analysis should produce agreement on
the problem to be addressed, an assessment of the costs and
benefits of the existing system and potential alternatives, and
a clear understanding of the disruptions associated with change
and how to mitigate or minimize those disruptions. Only then
can a strategy for improvement be developed. An appropriate
strategy must thoroughly document how particular proposals will
result in improved outcomes and productivity, who is responsible
for bringing about changes and when and how they will be
achieved. Information and a commitment to make fact-based
decisions are essential to improving performance. That
discipline needs to be applied by policy-makers and program
managers."
AB 1518
Page 4
Related legislation . AB 783 (Anderson) of 2009 requires that
all statutorily created state agencies, boards, and state
commissions that are funded by General Fund revenues, except for
the Franchise Tax Board, be repealed on January 1, 2022.
Previous legislation . AB 1869 (Anderson) of 2008 which
abolishes or consolidates various boards and commissions died in
the Assembly Business and Professions Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file.
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Rebecca May / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301