BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 213
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 213 (Silva) - As Introduced: January 31, 2011
Policy Committee: Business and
Professions Vote: 9 - 0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires state agencies, when providing notice of
proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation, to mail
or email the notice to local government agencies or local
government agency representatives that the agency believes may
be interested in, or impacted by, the proposed action.
Specifically, this bill:
1)States that a "local government agency representative" shall
include, but not be limited to, the following:
a) Countywide elected officials whose departments would be
impacted by a proposed action.
b) County administrators or executive offices of a county
whose operations may be impacted by a proposed action.
c) City managers of a city whose operations may be impacted
by a proposed action.
d) General managers of a special district whose operations
may be impacted by a proposed action.
2)Requires the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) to create,
maintain, and make available to a requesting agency, a
notification list of local government agency representatives.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Workload associated with departments determining which local
AB 213
Page 2
entities require notification and preparing the notice would
likely exceed $500,000 annually.
2)Annual printing and postage costs between $300,000 and
$450,000 for departments to notify the local entities as
specified by this bill. To the extent the local agencies and
their representatives opt to be notified electronically, those
printing and postage costs would be reduced.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author's office asserts there is anecdotal
evidence to suggest state agencies are not providing
sufficient notification of proposed regulatory modifications
to local governments. The author notes, "In one instance in
particular, cities were 'notified' of a proposal by a single
e-mail to the League of California Cities and special
districts were 'notified' by a single e-mail to the California
Special District Association."
The author contends that as a result of these email
notifications, most jurisdictions across the state were
unaware that the minimum 45-day comment period on regulations
was nearing expiration.
2)Background . The Administrative Procedures Act governs the
adoption of regulations by state agencies to ensure that they
are clear, necessary, legally valid, and available to the
public. In seeking adoption of a proposed regulation, state
agencies must comply with procedural requirements that include
publishing the proposed regulation, along with supporting
statement of reasons; mailing and publishing a notice of the
proposed action 45 days before a hearing or before the close
of the public comment period; and submitting a final statement
to OAL, which summarizes and responds to all objections,
recommendations, and proposed alternatives that were raised
during the public comment period. The OAL is then required to
approve or reject the proposed regulation within 30 days.
3)Related Legislation . AB 1957 (Silva) of 2010, a substantially
similar bill, would have required state agencies to mail a
notice of a proposed action to adopt, amend, or repeal a
AB 213
Page 3
regulation to local government agencies, as specified. This
bill was held on suspense in this committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916)
319-2081