Jurris.COM
Section 13337.3 Of Article 3. Revised Budgeting And Accounting System For Fiscal Affairs Of State Government From California Government Code >> Division 3. >> Title 2. >> Part 3. >> Chapter 3. >> Article 3.
13337.3
. (a) (1) "Advisory body" means every board, bureau,
commission, committee, panel, task force, or similar group created by
statute or executive order whose principal function is to review,
advise, plan, advocate, or promote.
(2) "State funded" means receiving direct or indirect support from the General Fund, from funds that could be made available for General Fund purposes, or from funds which could be used to free up General Fund moneys. The determination of whether an advisory body is state funded shall be made by the Director of Finance.
(b) On and after January 1, 1993, moneys may not be expended for the support of any state-funded advisory body unless that advisory body is evaluated pursuant to this section.
(c) The Governor's Budget submitted to the Legislature for the 1992-93 fiscal year shall include an addendum which evaluates the need for every state-funded advisory body in state government. That addendum shall identify each advisory body along with the relevant statutory or executive order reference establishing the advisory body, the funding source for each advisory body, including all direct and indirect costs and staff allocated, and an evaluation based on the following criteria:
(1) The function of the advisory body.
(2) Whether there is another appropriate governmental entity capable and suitable to carry on the function performed by the advisory body even if the new responsibility necessitates changing the composition or mandate of an existing body.
(3) Whether the size of the advisory body is no larger than necessary to assure a range of viewpoints and to reflect this state's diversity (7 to 13 members).
(4) Whether consumers and the general public constitute a majority of voting members or is there justification for specific advice from experts only.
(5) Whether the advisory body is authorized to have an executive officer appointed by the advisory body, and subject to Senate confirmation.
(6) Whether the agenda of the advisory body is significant to the Legislature or to a constitutional officer or if the advisory body reports to the Legislature, or a constitutional officer, whether the Legislature or the constitutional officer share in the appointing authority. If the Governor makes all of the appointments, whether those appointments subject to Senate confirmation.
(7) Whether strict conflict-of-interest provisions are applicable for each appointed member of the advisory body and the meetings of the body are open to the public.
(8) Whether appointing authorities are directed to appoint persons reflecting the ethnic and cultural diversity of the state.
(9) Whether a clear working relationship exists between the advisory body and other governmental agencies with which the advisory body reviews, advises, or plans.
(10) Where the advisory body is created to review and report on a specific issue, whether there is a date for reporting and a date at which time the advisory body shall terminate.
(2) "State funded" means receiving direct or indirect support from the General Fund, from funds that could be made available for General Fund purposes, or from funds which could be used to free up General Fund moneys. The determination of whether an advisory body is state funded shall be made by the Director of Finance.
(b) On and after January 1, 1993, moneys may not be expended for the support of any state-funded advisory body unless that advisory body is evaluated pursuant to this section.
(c) The Governor's Budget submitted to the Legislature for the 1992-93 fiscal year shall include an addendum which evaluates the need for every state-funded advisory body in state government. That addendum shall identify each advisory body along with the relevant statutory or executive order reference establishing the advisory body, the funding source for each advisory body, including all direct and indirect costs and staff allocated, and an evaluation based on the following criteria:
(1) The function of the advisory body.
(2) Whether there is another appropriate governmental entity capable and suitable to carry on the function performed by the advisory body even if the new responsibility necessitates changing the composition or mandate of an existing body.
(3) Whether the size of the advisory body is no larger than necessary to assure a range of viewpoints and to reflect this state's diversity (7 to 13 members).
(4) Whether consumers and the general public constitute a majority of voting members or is there justification for specific advice from experts only.
(5) Whether the advisory body is authorized to have an executive officer appointed by the advisory body, and subject to Senate confirmation.
(6) Whether the agenda of the advisory body is significant to the Legislature or to a constitutional officer or if the advisory body reports to the Legislature, or a constitutional officer, whether the Legislature or the constitutional officer share in the appointing authority. If the Governor makes all of the appointments, whether those appointments subject to Senate confirmation.
(7) Whether strict conflict-of-interest provisions are applicable for each appointed member of the advisory body and the meetings of the body are open to the public.
(8) Whether appointing authorities are directed to appoint persons reflecting the ethnic and cultural diversity of the state.
(9) Whether a clear working relationship exists between the advisory body and other governmental agencies with which the advisory body reviews, advises, or plans.
(10) Where the advisory body is created to review and report on a specific issue, whether there is a date for reporting and a date at which time the advisory body shall terminate.
