BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1554
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 28, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1554 (Jefferies) - As Amended: March 8, 2012
Policy Committee: Human
ServicesVote:6 - 0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires regional centers (RC) under contract with the
Department of Developmental Services (DDS) make specific
information available on their websites. Specifically, this bill
requires the posting of the following information:
1)Actual rates paid to each vendor.
2)Any public funds provided to a nonprofit housing organization
outside of the regular request for proposal process.
FISCAL EFFECT
One-time GF costs likely in excess of $200,000 for 21 Regional
Centers (RCs), combined, to gather and report the information
required, particularly the actual rates paid to vendors.
On-going GF costs in the range of $50,000 to maintain and update
the required information.
This bill establishes statewide requirements on the 21 RCs,
which are non-profit, nonpublic entities, serving 225,000
consumers via approximately 65,000 providers, including parents
of consumers.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . The author's intent is to require the 21 RCs to
disclose additional information on their websites in order to
increase transparency in the DDS system. Each of the 21
centers operates independently under a non-profit status and
is funded entirely with state money. The author contends that
AB 1554
Page 2
the RCs use their non-profit status to deny requestors
information that would typically be covered under the
California Public Records Act.
2)Budget Trailer Bill . To promote transparency, the recently
chaptered 2011-12 Budget Trailer Bill pertaining to DDS and
the RCs, SB 74 (Committee on Budget & Fiscal Review; Chapter
9, Statutes of 2011), requires each RC to adopt, maintain, and
post on its Internet Web site a board-approved policy
regarding transparency and access to public information. In
addition, each RC would be required to post certain
information, including fiscal audits, annual reports, contract
awards, names and addresses of all vendors, and board meeting
agendas.
3)Related Legislation . AB 862 (Silva & Jeffries), 2011, was
similar to this bill but included additional items to be
posted on RC Web sites and required semiannual updates of
vendor rates. AB 862 was vetoed by Gov. Brown. The veto
message referred to the inclusion of one of the items required
to be posted (related to conflict-of-interest statements),
which is not included in this bill.
AB 2220 (Silva), 2010, added RCs the list of public entities
bound by the requirements of the California Public Records
Act. That bill was held on this committee's Suspense File.
Analysis Prepared by : Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916)
319-2081