BILL ANALYSIS
SB 218
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 218 (Yee)
As Amended August 25, 2009
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :35-1
HIGHER EDUCATION 8-0 GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
18-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Portantino, Block, Cook, |Ayes:|Coto, Anderson, Chesbro, |
| |Fong, Galgiani, Huber, | |Cook, |
| |Ma, Ruskin | |De Leon, Galgiani, Hall, |
| | | |Hill, Jeffries, Lieu, |
| | | |Mendoza, Nestande, |
| | | |V. Manual Perez, |
| | | |Portantino, Silva, |
| | | |Torres, Torrico, Tran |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 16-0
--------------------------------
|Ayes:|De Leon, Conway, Ammiano, |
| |Coto, Davis, Duvall, |
| |Fuentes, Hall, Harkey, |
| |Miller, John A. Perez, |
| |Skinner, Solorio, Audra |
| |Strickland, Torlakson, |
| |Hill |
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Includes in the California Public Records Act (CPRA)
auxiliary organizations of the University of California (UC),
the California State University (CSU), and the California
Community Colleges (CCC), except as specified. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Expands the definition of "state agency" for purposes of CPRA
to include UC, CSU, and CCC Board of Governor's auxiliary
organizations and expands the definition of "local agency" for
purposes of CPRA to include CCC district auxiliary
SB 218
Page 2
organizations to include the following:
a) Student auxiliaries, as specified.
b) Any entity whose governing instrument provides in
substance both of the following:
i) Its purpose is to promote or assist the higher
education institution or to receive gifts, property, and
funds to be used for the benefit of the higher education
institution or any person or organization having an
official relationship therewith; and,
ii) Any of its directors, governors, or trustees are
either appointed or nominated by, or subject to, approval
of the governing board of the higher education
institution, an official of the institution, or selected
ex officio, from the membership of the student body,
faculty, government board, or administrative staff of the
institution.
c) Any entity that, exclusive of the foregoing subdivision
of this section, is designated as an auxiliary organization
by the higher education institution's governing body.
2)Defines UC auxiliaries, comparable to existing statutory
definitions for CSU and CCC auxiliaries, as follows:
a) An entity in which a UC official participates as a
director as part of his or her official duties.
b) An entity that operates a commercial service for the
benefit of a UC campus on a UC campus or other UC property.
c) An entity whose governing instrument provides in
substance both of the following:
i) That its purpose is to promote or assist any UC
campus or to receive gifts, property, and funds to be
used for the benefit of that campus or any person or
organization having an official relationship therewith;
and,
ii) That any of its directors, governors, or trustees
SB 218
Page 3
are either appointed or nominated by, or subject to, the
approval of an official of any UC campus, or serve, ex
officio, from the membership of the student body or the
faculty or the administrative staff of a campus.
d) Any entity whose governing instrument provides in
substance both of the following:
i) That its purpose is to promote or assist the UC
Board of Regents (Regents), or to receive gifts,
property, and funds to be used for the benefit of the UC
Regents, or any person or organization having an official
relationship therewith; and,
ii) That any of its directors, governors, or trustees
are either appointed or nominated by, or subject to, the
approval of the UC Regents or a UC official, or serve, ex
officio, from the membership of the UC Regents or the UC
administrative staff.
e) An entity that is designated by the UC Regents as a UC
auxiliary organization.
3)Stipulates that nothing in this bill shall be construed to
require disclosure of the names of individuals who donate to
an entity, as specified, or to a nonprofit entity, as
specified, if those individuals request anonymity. This
exemption does not apply if a donor, in a quid pro quo
arrangement, receives anything that has more than a nominal
value in exchange for the donation.
4)Stipulates that auxiliaries are not required to disclose trade
secrets or other records specifically exempted or prohibited
from disclosure by state and federal law, as specified.
5)Expresses the Legislature's intent to reject the court's
interpretation of state law regarding the application of CPRA
to auxiliary bodies such as those described in California
State University, Fresno Assn., Inc. v. Superior Court (2001)
90 Cal.App.4th 810 (CSU Fresno v. Superior Court).
EXISTING LAW : Requires UC, CSU, and CCC to comply with CPRA;
authorizes UC, CSU, and CCC to form auxiliary organizations for
various purposes related to their educational missions; and
SB 218
Page 4
defines CSU and CCC auxiliaries.
FISCAL EFFECT : No direct state costs.
COMMENTS : Auxiliary organizations are formed to further the
educational missions of their institution. Examples include
alumni groups, student associations, faculty organizations, and
groups that bear the name of the particular college or
university or campus. These groups operate as nonprofit public
benefit corporations chartered under the California Nonprofit
Public Benefit Corporation Law and must meet certain standards
of operation such as: 1) auditing and financial reporting
procedures with oversight by a certified public accountant; 2)
expenditures that are in accordance with policies delineated by
the governing body; 3) meetings of boards and committees that
are open to the public; and, 4) conformity of operational
procedures with regulations established by the governing body.
In the late 1990s, CSU Fresno built a multipurpose arena on its
campus funded primarily by private donations and operated by the
CSU Fresno Association, a nonprofit corporation that operates
all of the campus's commercial enterprises, including the
bookstore, food services, housing, and the student union. In
exchange for gifts to the campus's foundation (a separate
nonprofit corporation), some donors obtained luxury suites in
the arena for a specified number of years pursuant to licensing
agreements between the donors and the CSU Fresno Association.
The Fresno Bee made a CPRA request for the licensing agreements
and other documents in an attempt to learn the identity of the
donors and investigate whether the donors received favorable
treatment from any of the entities involved. The CSU Fresno
Association and the campus foundation denied the request for
information, claiming that they were not state agencies as
defined in CPRA and, therefore, not subject to its disclosure
requirements. The Fresno Bee filed a superior court action to
compel disclosure, and the trial court ordered disclosure. The
appellate court reversed the trial court's decision (CSU Fresno
v. Superior Court), concluding that CPRA was not written broadly
enough to include either entity in the definition.
Analysis Prepared by : Sandra Fried / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960
SB 218
Page 5
FN: 0002480