Several correspondents commented on the fact that state boards often provide much more access to public comment and debate and, because of the legal requirements imposed by the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, members may not talk to each other in private if they constitute a quorum of a Board or a committee of a Board.  On the Waste Board, for instance, a committee if often only three people so there are no "behind closed door" meetings.

Bagley what?

The Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, found in Government Code sections 11120-111321, covers all state boards and commissions and generally requires these bodies to publicly notice their meetings, prepare agendas, accept public testimony and conduct their meetings in public unless specifically authorized by the Act to meet in closed session.  The law is named after the two lawmakers who brought the bill, Bill Bagley and Rick Keene.

But aren't there public hearings before the adoption of regulations?

Generally, yes, but there is no constraint placed on agencies and departments of the Executive Branch (Governor and all agencies) on discussing and actually making decisions out of the public eye, which is a big difference from most state boards and commissions, because of Bagley-Keene.  In addition, many boards have non-Governor-appointed members, which, unlike administrative departments, might have more freedom to make independent evaluations of the subject matter under their control.

Other Boards

One correspondent informed me that the Governor and the minority party in both houses are seeking elimination of the full time, independent, Energy Commission which was signed into law in 1979 by then-Governor Ronald Reagan.

The Energy Commission was created to be the state's primary energy policy and planning agency.  The Commission's duties include forecasting future energy needs and keeping historical energy data, licensing thermal power plants of 50 megawatts or larger, promoting energy efficiency by setting the state's appliance and building efficiency standards and working with local governments to enforce those standards, supporting public interest energy research, supporting renewable energy by providing market support to existing, new, and emerging renewable technologies, providing incentives for small wind and fuel cell electricity systems, providing incentives for solar electricity systems in new home construction, implementing the state's Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program, and planning for, and directing, the state response to energy emergencies.

The Governor has indicated he would like to replace the Commission with a Secretary of Energy who would serve at the pleasure of the Governor.

Some Boards are not full-time

Another correspondent indicated that there are several boards whose members are not full-time, and some where the Chair is full-time and others are part-time, such as the California Air Resources Board.  Several of the members of that Board serve on their local air boards or are electeds from various areas. 

It is still the case, however, that these State boards and local boards have open and transparent policies for rule-making and enforcement.

Boards that regulate professions in California

Several correspondents complained that some boards set up to monitor various professions in California do not provide the benefits associated with an independent board, as a number of them are dominated by the very professionals they are designed to oversee.

On the other hand, several wrote that they do not favor oversight solely by a government Agency, because there is insufficient openness in the process.

These musings, taken together, raise a very good question about whether an administrative unit, overseen by an Agency in the Executive Branch, does a better job of regulating a profession than a board dominated by the professionals in that profession.  On the one hand, professionals know best what might be possible and desirable and their input is valuable.  On the other hand, as we've seen with several of the boards overseeing and regulating these professions, like-minded professionals may go a bit too easy on their brethren.

My own opinion would tend more to fixing those boards by making them more professional in oversight and not allowing a majority of the members of the board to be those who are governed by the board.  Rather I believe they should include a majority of consumers and others conversant with the profession but not dependent on it.  Such changes would take a bit of legislation and discussion, but it could be very worth the time required.

Next essays: a series on the budget

These will present information on the continuous wrangling that has gone on since last fall and the document that was finally adopted.