BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2058
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 2058 (Wilk) - As Amended: April 9, 2014
Policy Committee: Governmental
Organization Vote: 19-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill modifies the definition of "state body" in the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (the Bagley-Keene Act) to clarify
that standing committees of a state body, including advisory
bodies, that have a continuing subject matter jurisdiction or a
regular meeting schedule fixed by formal action are state bodies
for purposes of the Bagley-Keene Act regardless of the number of
individuals that comprise those committees.
FISCAL EFFECT
Potentially significant costs, in excess of $150,000 to the GF,
to state agencies for complying with notice and open meeting
requirements in instances currently not subject to those
requirements.
COMMENTS
1) Purpose. According to the author, the current definition of
"state body" in the Bagley-Keene Act contains an ambiguity
with respect to whether standing committees composed of fewer
than three members need to comply with the public notice and
open meeting requirements of the Act. The author contends
this ambiguity has been interpreted by certain state agencies
to allow standing committees to hold closed-door meetings so
long as those committees contain only two members and do not
vote on action items. AB 2058 would clarify that all standing
committees, including advisory committees, are subject to the
transparency of open meeting regulations regardless of
committee size or membership.
AB 2058
Page 2
2) Open Meeting Acts. The Government Code contains two parallel
open meeting statutes, the Bagley-Keene Act for state
government, and the Ralph M. Brown Act (the Brown Act) for
local governments. The philosophy underpinning the two acts
is that transparency and consensus should be favored over
administrative efficiency in most cases. The acts explicitly
mandate open meetings for state and local agencies, boards,
and commissions, providing the public with the ability to
monitor and participate in the decision-making process.
3) State Body Definition. Prior to 1993, the Bagley-Keene Act
and the Brown Act contained very similar definitions for
"state body". Following an interpretation of that definition
by a particular local government to exempt two-member standing
committees from the open meeting requirements of the Brown
Act, the Legislature amended the definition of "state body" in
a similar manner to that which the author proposes in this
bill. AB 2058 would align the definitions and requirements
for open meetings among standing committees between the
Bagley-Keene Act and the Brown Act as amended in 1993.
4) Opposition. The California Board of Accountancy (the CBA)
opposes AB 2058 on the grounds that the bill appears to
exclude even a single member from acting in an advisory body
capacity without public notice. According to the CBA, this
should prevent it and its various committees from asking its
members to draft a letter, provide expert analysis, or work on
legal language without giving public notice. Under current
law, the advisory activities of the CBA's one- and two-member
committees are vetted and voted upon in a publically noticed
meeting of the whole committee board.
5) Staff comment. The author may wish to consider whether the
ambiguity highlighted in the CBA opposition letter merits
clarification. Currently, subsection (c) of the "state body"
definition includes "an advisory board, advisory commission,
advisory committee?or similar multimember advisory body?"
(emphasis added). As drafted, the new definition attempts to
clarify that "?a standing committee of a state body,
irrespective of its composition,?" (emphasis added) is a state
body.
As a result of these two provisions, it may remain unclear
whether a one person standing committee is intended to be
considered a state body for purposes of the revised
AB 2058
Page 3
definition.
Analysis Prepared by : Joel Tashjian / APPR. / (916) 319-2081