From: Yelverton-Zamarripa, Karen

Subject: Diaz Bill Moves Out of Assembly

Importance: High

 

To: Chancellor Reed, Richard West, Campus Presidents, Campus Legislative Liaisons and CABO Members:

 

       AB 491 (Diaz) was approved 51-3 on the Assembly Floor this afternoon with the author's commitment to adopt these amendments in the Senate: threshold raised to $1 million; remove requirement for independent oversight consultant; remove DGS as the oversight agency. However, the author implied that he still wishes to designate some state entity (i.e. Department of Finance, a new Department of Information Technology (DOIT) other?) as having oversight over IT projects.

 

       This is a bit disappointing in that is not everything we wanted or hoped for, but at least it is a step in the right direction.

 

       CSU remains opposed to the bill until we see the amendments; however based on Diaz's statement it is clear that he still intends to have another entity involved in our IT projects -- and reduce our authority in the operations of the campuses and system.

 

       The vote count was as follows:

 

       Ayes (51): Bates, Benoit, Bermudez, Calderon, Chan, Chavez, Chu, Cogdill, Cohn, Diaz, Dymally, Firebaugh, Frommer, Goldberg, Hancock, Harman, J. Horton, Keene, Kehoe, Koretz, La Malfa, La Suer, Laird, Leno, Leslie, Levine, Lieber, Longville, Maddox, Matthews, McCarthy, Montanez, Mountjoy, Mullin, Nakano, Nation, Negrete McLeod, Nunez, Oropeza, Parra, Pavley, Plescia, Salinas, Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wiggins, Wolk, Wyland, Yee, Speaker Wesson.

 

       Noes (3): Bogh, Dutton, Richman.

 

       Not Voting (26): Aghazarian, Berg, Campbell, Canciamilla, Corbett, Correa, Cox, Daucher, Dutra, Garcia, Haynes, S. Horton, Houston, Jackson, Liu, Lowenthal, Maldonado, Maze, Nakanishi, Pacheco, Reyes, Ridley-Thomas, Runner, Samuelian, Spitzer, Strickland.

 

       Here is a summary of the floor debate:

 

       Diaz: Original estimate was only $350 million but project approaching $700 million; has not accomplished what it was supposed to do Reference to Oracle - same situation at CSU CSU is exempt from any kind of oversight unlike other state agencies May 16 Roundtable at San Jose State - staff from several campuses said the system is not working the way it is supposed to Chancellor Reed has implemented some of the audit recommendations but not all of them CSU needs proper oversight, accountability Has heard concerns from several members commits to raising threshold to $1 million amendment to take out DGS and identify appropriate body to do oversight there was no competitive bidding and redirection of dollars not approved by the legislature deleted outside consultant for project oversight

 

       Wyland:        - Great bill; legislature should be doing more of this.

 

       Nation: Posed question: raising threshold to $1 million? Asked for "aye" vote as amended.

 

       La Suer: Asked author to repeat references to costs of project Asked whether this was competitively bid == Diaz answered NO Made reference to "another government institution that doesn't really care" because it is "free money"

 

       Cohn: CSU has shown minimal compliance with audit recommendations CSU not meeting BSA standards in complying with audit CSU showing complete disregard for Legislature Cost overruns of $220 million CSU making egregious argument that oversight is duplicative of current CSU oversight functions Trust Legislature put in CSU has been broken Fact remains that Legislature needs to exercise serious oversight

 

       Lieber: Strongly urge "aye" vote

 

       Bermudez: Asked for aye vote as amended, but indicated he has seen the system and "it works at Long Beach and San Diego."

 

The bill now moves to the Senate Education Committee for its next step.  We will immediately begin working with the committee staff -- and you can assume we will need you to start your work locally with the members on this bill.  The amendments are an improvement; however we do not want an outside agency overseeing our operations!

 

The vote count it also an opportunity to you to hold your legislators accountable for their commitments to you regarding AB 491.  While it is true that the bill is better, and the politics were strong for Democrats from leadership to not embarrass another colleague with defeat in the house of origin, people who did not vote or voted no should thanked as soon as possible.  And those that voted for the bill need more work -- from you and your community in understanding CMS, dispelling the misinformation and discrediting of this great institution, and holding them accountable to commitments they may have made to you to not support the bill.  The only way advocacy works at the community level is to make sure that they know you and others are watching, and know what they do!

 

Thanks for all the hard work.  My colleagues here did great work with all your help as well as our consultants, colleagues in the C.O. and within state government.  We have made progress but we have a way to go - in defeating the bill and rebuilding the image of the system given the active work of CFA, members of the legislature and the media to discredit all of us.

Karen

End