AB 907 amends Health and Safety Code §39512.5 to change how certain members of the State Air Resources Board (ARB) are paid. The bill removes the current prohibition on compensation for members appointed from specified air quality or air pollution control districts and makes those members eligible for the annual salary set under Government Code §11564.
At the same time, the bill repeals the $100-per-day (up to $1,000/month) per diem currently payable to elected public official members of the ARB.
The change equalizes formal salary treatment across board members and could make service on the ARB more accessible to individuals who cannot serve on an unpaid basis. It also shifts recurring salary obligations into the ARB's compensation structure and leaves intact existing rules for reimbursing actual and necessary expenses, which remain allocated between local districts and the state board depending on how the member qualified.
At a Glance
What It Does
AB 907 removes the statutory ban on compensating ARB members appointed from air districts and makes those members eligible for the annual salary under Government Code §11564; it also eliminates the $100/day per‑diem for elected public official members. Expense reimbursement rules remain in place.
Who It Affects
Directly affects ARB members appointed from local air quality or air pollution control districts and the elected public official members who serve on the board as ex officio, nonvoting members. Indirectly affects the ARB’s payroll and state budget administration, and local air districts that reimburse member expenses.
Why It Matters
The bill alters incentives and access to board service (compensation vs unpaid service) and reallocates recurring compensation obligations within state governance. For professionals tracking board governance, appointments, or budget impacts, this changes who can feasibly serve and which entity ultimately pays for membership costs.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 907 rewrites the compensation picture for a subset of State Air Resources Board members. Currently, members appointed from specified local air districts are statutorily required to “serve without compensation,” though they can be reimbursed for expenses; elected public official members meanwhile receive a per‑diem for days spent on board business.
The bill removes the unpaid‑service prohibition for district appointees and makes them eligible to receive the same annual salary other board members get under Government Code §11564. It simultaneously eliminates the $100/day per‑diem for elected public official members.
Mechanically, the bill does not disturb the existing expense‑reimbursement framework. The statute still directs that a member appointed from a named district be reimbursed by that district, while members from districts not specifically named are reimbursed by the state board.
The bill therefore separates the concepts of travel/expense reimbursement (which remains a local or board obligation per current rules) from regular compensation (which the amendment places squarely under the state board’s salary authority).Because the salary is referenced to Government Code §11564, AB 907 ties these district appointees’ regular pay to an existing statutory salary vehicle rather than creating a new dollar figure in Health and Safety Code. The bill does not itself set a dollar amount in §39512.5, nor does it include an appropriation; implementation will require the ARB and the Department of Finance to account for any increase in recurring payroll obligations within their budgets.
The change is primarily structural: it removes a legal barrier to paying certain board members and repeals a small daily per‑diem payment for elected public officials.
The Five Things You Need to Know
AB 907 deletes the phrase requiring members appointed from specified air districts to “serve without compensation,” making those appointees eligible for regular salary payments.
The bill repeals the statutory $100 per day (not to exceed $1,000 per month) per‑diem previously payable to elected public official members of the ARB.
AB 907 preserves the existing expense‑reimbursement allocation: members from districts named in §39510(d) are reimbursed by their district; other district appointees are reimbursed by the state board.
The statute ties the new compensation eligibility to Government Code §11564 — the annual salary reference — instead of creating a new salary amount in the Health and Safety Code.
The bill does not include an appropriation; it changes compensation authority and therefore creates a recurring payroll obligation that the ARB and state budget process will need to absorb.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Removes unpaid‑service requirement for district appointees
This amendment strikes the provision that forced members appointed from specified air districts to “serve without compensation.” Practically, that legal prohibition is replaced by language making those members eligible for salary, aligning them with other paid members. For compliance officers and budget staff, the key operational change is that the ARB becomes (or remains) the vehicle for paying a regular salary to these members rather than relying on unpaid service as the default.
Keeps existing expense‑reimbursement allocation
Subdivision (b) remains intact: if a member is appointed from a district named in §39510(d), that district reimburses actual and necessary expenses; for members from unnamed districts, the state board reimburses expenses. That preserves local fiscal responsibility for travel and out‑of‑pocket costs for many appointees, even as the bill changes salary treatment. Practically, districts should expect to continue handling reimbursements unless administrative arrangements change.
Repeals elected‑official per diem and references Government Code salary
The bill removes the $100/day (capped at $1,000/month) per‑diem language for elected public official members and clarifies that members described in subdivision (a) shall receive the salary specified in Government Code §11564, paid by the state board. That ties ongoing compensation to an existing salary provision and shifts the design and payment of recurring compensation into the ARB’s payroll, with potential downstream effects on budget classification and benefit/withholding administration.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Members appointed from specified air quality or air pollution control districts — they become eligible for an annual salary and no longer must rely on unpaid service, improving financial accessibility to board service.
- Prospective board candidates who previously could not afford unpaid service — by removing the unpaid requirement, the bill expands the candidate pool to individuals who require compensation to participate.
- The State Air Resources Board institutionally — the ARB gains a clearer, uniform compensation rule for district appointees, which can simplify governance and recruitment planning.
Who Bears the Cost
- The California State Air Resources Board and ultimately the state budget — making district appointees eligible for salary creates a recurring payroll obligation that the ARB must fund or request in the budget process.
- Elected public official members of the ARB — they lose the $100/day per‑diem payment that compensated time spent on board duties, which may reduce take‑home pay for some local officials.
- Local air districts for expense reimbursements — while salary responsibility shifts, the bill leaves intact the districts’ obligation to reimburse actual and necessary expenses for members appointed from named districts, maintaining that local fiscal burden.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The core tension is equity versus cost: the bill removes a barrier that made board service financially inaccessible to some district‑appointed members, promoting fairness and broader recruitment, but it simultaneously creates a new recurring state payroll obligation and eliminates a small per‑diem safety net for elected officials — forcing a trade‑off between improving access to governance and increasing fiscal demands on state and local budgets.
The bill confronts a common governance tension — equity of compensation versus fiscal discipline — but it leaves several operational questions unresolved. Most immediately, tying pay eligibility to Government Code §11564 changes legal authority but does not state a dollar amount in the Health and Safety Code or provide funding.
Implementing the new salary obligations will require the ARB and the Department of Finance to identify funds or request increases through the budget process; the bill itself contains no appropriation language, so timing and source of funds are open questions.
Another practical ambiguity concerns total compensation outcomes. Some elected public officials who previously received per‑diem payments may end up with lower or higher net compensation depending on how the Government Code salary compares to the former per‑diem income and whether salary is prorated for part‑time service.
The bill also preserves local reimbursement responsibilities for named districts, so while salary costs may migrate to the ARB, districts will continue to incur travel and expense costs — an uneven mix of local and state fiscal impacts. Finally, the interaction with state laws on dual compensation, local government employment rules, and the administrative burden of adding additional payroll recipients (tax withholding, benefits eligibility, reporting) is not addressed in the text and may require separate administrative guidance.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.