California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB32

Introduced
12/5/16  
Introduced
12/5/16  
Refer
1/19/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Engrossed
5/22/17  
Refer
5/22/17  
Refer
5/22/17  
Refer
6/1/17  
Refer
6/1/17  
Report Pass
7/11/17  
Report Pass
7/11/17  
Enrolled
8/31/17  
Enrolled
8/31/17  
Chaptered
10/9/17  
Chaptered
10/9/17  
Passed
10/9/17  

Caption

California State Auditor.

Impact

The introduction of AB 32 signifies a crucial step in reforming how the California State Auditor is appointed, shifting from a more limited nomination process to one that is open and comprehensive. This change allows for greater scrutiny and input from various stakeholders in the government and public sectors. By expanding the candidate pool, the bill aims to ensure that the chosen auditor possesses not only the requisite qualifications but also represents a diverse range of perspectives that could enhance the auditing process and maintain public trust in governmental financial integrity.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 32, introduced by Rodriguez, amends Section 8543.2 of the Government Code, specifically addressing the appointment process of the California State Auditor. The bill aims to enhance transparency and accountability in the selection of the California State Auditor by requiring the Joint Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) to conduct a comprehensive search for candidates. This involves providing a 120-day notice period for applications and allowing nominations from a wider range of individuals and entities, including members of the Legislature and professional organizations. The intent of this requirement is to ensure a more inclusive and thorough selection process.

Sentiment

The sentiment around AB 32 appears to be largely positive among supporters who view the changes as necessary to improve the integrity of the auditor's office. Advocates for the bill argue that this reform will enhance government accountability and public confidence in the auditing process. However, there may be reservations regarding potential bureaucratic complexities or the politicization of the selection process, though no significant opposition to the bill was evident during discussions.

Contention

While the legislation is primarily framed as a progressive reform, there are concerns about the execution of the bill's broader nomination process. Some stakeholders may worry that the longer nomination period and expanded sources of nomination could lead to delays or political maneuvering that disrupts the timely appointment of the California State Auditor. Balancing the need for thoroughness in candidate selection against the need for efficient governmental functioning will be an ongoing consideration as the bill is implemented.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB130

Postsecondary education: Higher Education Performance, Accountability, and Coordination Commission.

CA AB217

Postsecondary education: Office of Higher Education Performance and Accountability.

CA AB1936

Postsecondary education: Office of Higher Education Performance and Accountability.

CA AB2613

Jacqueline Marie Zbur Rare Disease Advisory Council.

CA AB832

California Transportation Commission: membership.

CA SB66

California Council on the Future of Transportation: advisory committee: autonomous vehicle technology.

CA AB820

State boards and commissions: seniors.

CA AB2207

State boards and commissions: representatives of older adults.