BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair
AB 1948 (Mullin) - County officers: qualifications for office.
Amended: April 7, 2014 Policy Vote: G&F 5-2
Urgency: No Mandate: Yes
Hearing Date: June 23, 2014
Consultant: Mark McKenzie
This bill may meet the criteria for referral to the Suspense
File.
Bill Summary: AB 1948 would establish minimum qualifications for
persons elected or appointed to the following county offices on
or after January 1, 2015: treasurer, tax collector,
treasurer-tax collector, consolidated director of finance, and
director of finance.
Fiscal Impact: Reimbursable mandate costs, primarily one-time
and likely less than $50,000 General Fund. One-time costs for
counties to establish procedures for determining that a
candidate meets the minimum qualifications would likely only be
reimbursable to the extent that a county did not previously
establish minimum qualifications under current law. Ongoing
reimbursable costs to verify minimum qualifications for
prospective candidates would apply to all counties, but those
costs should be minor. (see staff comments)
Background: Existing law establishes numerous county offices,
including county treasurer, tax collector, and director of
finance. Many counties have combined the offices of treasurer
and tax collector, or combined the offices of auditor,
controller, treasurer, and tax collector into one elected or
appointed office of the director of finance. Existing law
prohibits a person from being considered a legally qualified
candidate for specified offices, including county treasurer, tax
collector, and treasurer-tax collector, unless the person files
a declaration of candidacy, nomination papers, or statement of
write-in candidacy, accompanied by specified documentation
sufficient to establish that the person meets qualifications for
service, as determined by the official with whom the papers are
filed.
In response to Orange County's bankruptcy in 1994, SB 866
AB 1948 (Mullin)
Page 1
(Craven, 1995) increased oversight of county investment
practices. SB 866 required a person to meet at least one of the
following five criteria to be eligible for election or
appointment to the office of county treasurer, county tax
collector, or county treasurer-tax collector, if the county
board of supervisors enacted an ordinance to adopt the
requirements:
The person has served in a senior financial management
position dealing with similar financial responsibilities in
a public agency for three years, including, but not limited
to treasurer, tax collector, auditor, auditor-controller,
or the chief deputy or an assistant in those offices;
The person possesses a baccalaureate, masters, or
doctoral degree from an accredited college or university
with a major in business administration, public
administration, economics, finance, accounting, or a
related field, and completion of at least 16 units in
accounting, auditing, or finance;
The person possesses a certificate issued by the
California Board of Accounting, and a permit to practice as
a certified public accountant.
The person possesses a valid charter issued by the
Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts, as specified; or
The person possesses a certificate from the Treasury
Management Association, as specified.
Forty-seven of California's 58 counties have voluntarily adopted
the qualifications. The following counties have established a
Director of Finance position: Glenn, Kings, Marin, Mono,
Sacramento, and Santa Clara. Of these, only Sacramento and
Santa Clara Counties have not adopted minimum qualifications
associated with those positions.
Proposed Law: AB 1948 would require a person elected or
appointed after on or after January 1, 2015 as a county
treasurer, tax collector, treasurer-tax collector, consolidated
director of finance, director of finance, or any office
consolidated with the office of treasurer or tax collector to
meet at least one of five specified qualifications. The bill
would also delete provisions authorizing counties to establish
minimum qualifications for the offices of treasurer, tax
collector, and treasurer-tax collector.
Staff Comments: Although there are only eleven counties that
AB 1948 (Mullin)
Page 2
haven't voluntarily established minimum qualifications for the
specified offices through an action of the board of supervisors,
any county may seek reimbursement for mandated costs established
by the bill. Government Code section 17565 states that "if a
local agency or a school district, at its option, has been
incurring costs which are subsequently mandated by the state,
the state shall reimburse the local agency or school district
for those costs incurred after the operative date of the
mandate."
Counties have had the option of establishing minimum
requirements for county treasurers, tax collectors, and
treasurer-tax collectors, as prescribed in SB 866 (Craven,
1995), and the vast majority of counties established those
minimum requirements, but AB 1948 makes those minimum
qualifications mandatory for all counties. Since 47 counties
have already incurred those one-time costs to establish
procedures for verifying a candidates minimum requirements, the
Commission on State Mandates is not likely to determine that
those counties can seek reimbursement for costs incurred prior
to the enactment of this bill. Going forward, those counties
that voluntarily established minimum qualifications could seek
reimbursement for any ongoing costs to verify a candidate's
qualifications, but those costs are likely to be minor.
Counties that did not voluntarily establish minimum
qualifications for the specified offices would likely be
eligible for reimbursement for both one-time costs to establish
procedures, as well as ongoing costs to verify qualifications.
Staff estimates that one-time costs for these counties would be
less than $50,000, and ongoing costs are likely to be minor.
Actual costs would depend upon what activities are deemed to be
reasonably necessary to comply with the statute, as determined
by the Commission on State Mandates in a test claim filed by
affected counties.
Any costs related to compliance with the minimum qualifications
are a responsibility of the individual who seeks to hold one of
the specified offices, since they are requirements imposed on
the individuals themselves, and not the counties.