BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 103
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 17, 2011

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                      SB 103 (Liu) - As Amended:  July 12, 2011 

          Policy Committee:                              Governmental 
          Organization Vote:                            13 - 0 

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          No     Reimbursable:              

           SUMMARY  

          This bill requires, upon the request of a member of a state 
          body, a state body to hold open or closed meeting by 
          teleconference, unless the chair of that state body determines 
          that it is more costly to hold the meeting by teleconference 
          than it would be to hold it in person. In addition, this bill 
          requires state agencies that operate internet websites to 
          provide a live audio or video feed on the website for any board 
          meetings that are open to the public.    

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)Boards that currently offer webcasting report costs of 
            approximately $2,000 per meeting, with additional archiving 
            costs of approximately $100 per month. Given the large number 
            of boards and other agencies in the state that currently hold 
            regular monthly or quarterly meetings and maintain a website 
            for their organization, annual costs could easily exceed 
            several million dollars (General Fund and various special 
            funds).  

          2)To the extent video and teleconferencing reduces state costs 
            for boards that no longer have to regularly pay for their 
            members to travel to meetings, it could result in savings to 
            various general fund and special fund departments. 

           COMMENTS  

           1)Rationale  . The bill would allow state organizations to use 
            teleconferencing when it is more cost-effective than travel.  
            According to the author, agencies and departments should 








                                                                  SB 103
                                                                  Page  2

            conduct meetings electronically to save resources and reduce 
            costs.  Video and teleconferencing are green technologies that 
            allow organizations to mitigate energy use and reduce costs by 
            dramatically reducing the need to travel. 
             
             In addition, this bill requires all state agencies and boards 
            to provide a live audio or video broadcast of their open 
            meetings if those agencies currently operate an internet 
            website. 

           2)Support  .  Sierra Club of California states that with 
            relatively inexpensive video and teleconferencing equipment 
            available, and considering the state's deficit, California 
            cannot afford to continue reimbursing gratuitous travel costs. 
            Additionally, transportation produces nearly 40 % of the 
            greenhouse gas emissions in California.  Moreover, SB 103 
            would increase opportunities for public participation in 
            agency decision-making by requiring live audio or video of 
            public meetings to be posted online.
           Analysis Prepared by  :    Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916) 
          319-2081