BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 475
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 13, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
SB 475 (Wright) - As Amended: June 7, 2012
SENATE VOTE : Vote not relevant
SUBJECT : Local agencies: open meetings: teleconferences.
SUMMARY : Permits local health authorities to establish a quorum
under the state's open meeting laws via teleconference if at
least 50% of the board members constituting the quorum are
physically present within the boundaries of the jurisdiction.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Reestablishes the authority of local health authorities to
establish a quorum under the
Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act) via teleconference by counting
members outside the jurisdiction towards the number needed for
a quorum if at least 50% of that quorum are physically present
within the jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a
teleconference number and any associated access codes to allow
any person to call in to participate in the meeting, and
identifies the number and access codes in the notice and
agenda of the meeting.
2)Provides for the authorization to sunset on January 1, 2018.
3)Makes legislative findings and declarations relative to the
difficulty of obtaining a quorum
of health authority board members within the physical
jurisdiction of the authority.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires that all meetings of the legislative body of a local
agency be open and public, and requires that all persons be
permitted to attend any such meetings, unless otherwise
specified in law.
SB 475
Page 2
2)Allows the legislative body of a local agency to use
teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the
legislative body of a local agency in connection with any
meeting or proceeding authorized by law.
3)Specifies that if the legislative body of a local agency
elects to use teleconferencing, it must post agendas at all
teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings
in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional
rights of the parties or the public appearing before the
legislative body of a local agency.
4)Requires that each teleconference location be identified in
the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each
teleconference location be accessible to the public.
5)Requires that during the teleconference, at least a quorum of
the members of the legislative body participate from locations
within the boundaries of the territory over which the local
agency exercises jurisdiction.
6)Provides that, in counties selected by the Director of Health
Care Services with the concurrence of the county, a special
county health authority may be established in order to meet
the problems of delivery of publicly assisted medical care in
each county, and to demonstrate ways of promoting quality care
and cost efficiency.
7)Requires, according to existing constitutional provisions,
that a statute that limits the right
of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of
public officials and agencies be adopted with findings
demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the
need for protecting that interest.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)The Brown Act requires local governments' meetings to be "open
and public," in order to promote citizen involvement in and
SB 475
Page 3
oversight of their local legislative bodies. Local officials
must post agendas 72 hours before their regular meetings and
they are prohibited from discussing or making decisions about
topics that are not on the agenda.
The Brown Act allows local governments' legislative bodies to
use teleconferencing for their meetings as long as they post
agendas at all teleconference locations, take all votes by
roll call, and accommodate persons wishing to address the
governing body. Each teleconference location must be
identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting and must be
accessible to the public.
In 1998, the Legislature added the requirement that, during a
teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the
governing body must participate from locations within the
boundaries of the local government's jurisdiction �SB 139
(Kopp) Chapter 260, Statutes of 1998]. The aim was to require
that a sufficient number of board members remain in the
physical jurisdiction during the meeting in order to ensure
that at least one physical teleconference site was available
so that members of the public could more easily participate.
In 2005, the Legislature created an exception to that
teleconference requirement by permitting health authorities to
reach a teleconference meeting quorum by counting members not
physically within the authority's boundaries as long as those
outside members constitute a minority of the quorum �AB 1438
(Salinas), Chapter 540, Statutes of 2005]. That measure also
contained a January 1, 2009 sunset date. According to the
author, there were no reported problems with the use of the
exemption during the 2006-2009 period. However, it is
possible that some health authorities continued to operate in
reliance upon this provision even after the sunset date.
2)This bill would reestablish a special authorization for local
health authorities to meet their quorum meeting requirement
via teleconference under the Brown Act by counting board
members calling from outside of the authority's physical
jurisdiction. Health authorities would still be required to
have over 50% of the quorum within the boundaries of the
SB 475
Page 4
jurisdiction during the teleconference, and must provide the
public teleconference number and any access code in the notice
and agenda for the meeting. This re-authorization will sunset
in 2018. The measure is sponsored by Local Health Plans of
California.
3)As defined, a health authority is any of various specified
commissions, non-profit corporations, joint powers
authorities, advisory committees or other entities that have
been selected or authorized to meet the problems of delivery
of publicly-assisted medical care in certain counties, usually
by operating a public, not-for-profit health plan. As of
2005, local health authorities served over 1.4 million
Medi-Cal, Healthy Families, and Healthy Kids beneficiaries in
nine counties throughout California
According to the sponsor, "�l]ocal health plans' governing
boards consist of doctors, hospitals, Medi-Cal beneficiaries,
consumer advocates, county supervisors, community clinics and
county health departments. Most of these representatives have
full-time jobs outside of their board duties and very
demanding schedules. Even with regularly scheduled monthly or
bi-monthly meetings, local health plan boards find it
challenging to meet quorum requirements."
4)The reauthorization of a provision that relaxes Brown Act
requirements for health authorities alone raises certain
questions that the Committee may wish to consider:
a) First, is there sufficient reason to believe that health
authorities are having such a difficult time meeting
teleconference quorum requirements that a special exemption
is called for under the Brown Act? Should health authority
boards instead consider potential board members who are
based in the jurisdiction or travel outside of it less
frequently?
b) Second, what kind of precedent does this extension set?
Should other types of public agencies also be permitted to
meet via teleconference with a minority of the quorum
calling from outside the jurisdiction?
SB 475
Page 5
5)AB 1438 (Salinas) created the original quorum exemption for
health authorities that is the subject of this bill, as well
as the provision for the 2009 sunset date. The measure was
approved June 6, 2005, in this Committee by a 7-0 vote.
6)Support arguments : According to the sponsor, by "allowing
half of the members necessary to establish a quorum to call in
from outside the board's jurisdiction during teleconferenced
meetings, SB 475 will allow local health plan boards to meet
and conduct business on a regular basis with the benefit of
the continued participation by their highly qualified - and
busy - board members."
Opposition arguments : One might argue that there is no
evidence to believe that health authorities are more burdened
by the quorum requirements of the Brown Act than any other
public entity, and that the appropriate response should be
greater selectivity in choosing board members.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Local Health Plans of California �SPONSOR]
L.A. Care Health Plan
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Hank Dempsey / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958
SB 475
Page 6