BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2473
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 28, 2010

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                 AB 2473 (Huber) - As Introduced:  February 19, 2010 

          Policy Committee:                              Business and  
          Professions  Vote:                            7-4

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:               

           SUMMARY  

          This bill requires the State Controller's Office (SCO) to  
          annually report specific aggregated data regarding state  
          employees residing within Sacramento County. Specifically, this  
          bill:

          1)Requires the SCO to provide to the Department of General  
            Services (DGS), by July 1, 2011 and annually thereafter, the  
            number of state employees, by state agency, residing in each  
            ZIP Code within the metropolitan area of Sacramento County and  
            within each incorporated city in the county.

          2)Requires DGS to include in its annual status report on the  
            Capitol Area Plan the information reported by the SCO per (1).

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          One-time costs of $150,000 to the SCO, mainly for information  
          technology expenses associated with building a database to  
          obtain data for the initial report.  This cost would be paid by  
          DGS from the Service Revolving Fund, which receives revenue  
          through DGS's charges to state agencies for its services.   
          Ongoing costs should be minor and absorbable. 

           COMMENTS  

           1)Purpose  . According to the author's office, "DGS currently does  
            not consider the residential locations of the majority of  
            their workforce when planning for the construction or  
            acquisition of new state buildings.  As a result, communities  
            with the highest concentration of state workers often have to  








                                                                  AB 2473
                                                                  Page  2

            travel further distances to get to work.  This increases  
            traffic congestion, vehicle emission levels?

            "Making this information available would allow these  
            communities access to better understand where state workers  
            are concentrated, which agencies and departments they are  
            employed and allow them to make transportation related  
            decisions that would aid complying with AB 32 (Nunez), Chapter  
            488, Statutes of 2006, reducing emissions and other  
            transportation related decisions."

           2)Prior Legislation  .  AB 1006 (Buchanan), which would have  
            required DGS to consider specific factors, including the  
            residential location of workforce, in selecting state building  
            locations, was vetoed. The governor argued that the bill was  
            unnecessary.
           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081