Part of the Bay Area News Group

Schwarzenegger taps 70 in what could be last round of appointments

By Steven Harmon
Friday, December 31st, 2010 at 6:14 pm in Uncategorized.

Assuming Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (or at least his appointments chief) is done for the year, here is a statistical accounting of his last round of appointments:

70 appointments to 18 different boards and commissions;
40 Republicans, 29 Democrats and 1 American Independent
30 are reappointments
25 were to the California Partnership, 10 to the California Film Commission, 5 to the Hoover Commission, 5 to the Mental Health Services Oversight & Accountability Commission (all unpaid)
58 will receive no salary and won’t require Senate confirmation
8 will receive $100 per diems but won’t require Senate confirmation
1 will receive a $50 per diem but won’t require Senate confirmation
3 are salaried and will require Senate confirmation:

William Fox to the State Personnel Board for a salary of $40,669. Fox, a Republican, had served as deputy chief of staff for Schwarzenegger since 2006.

Kari Miner to the Public Employer Relations Board for a salary of $128,109. Miner, a Republican, is a consultant to small businesses on image and efficiency.

John Peck to the Board of Parole Hearings for a salary of $111,845. Peck, a Democrat, has served on the board since 2009.

Another appointee of note: Aaron McLear, Schwarzenegger’s press secretary, to the unpaid California Film Commission.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • Ralph Hoffmann

    Who are the other 66 appointees, what party affiliation, and where do they live?

  • John W

    So much for blowing up boards and commissions. It would be interesting if the Times or somebody could create a list of all the boards and commissions, budget and headcount, number of appointees and the salary and benefits received by appointees. In total, they are a drop in the bucket relative to California’s overall finances. However, having served as the executive director of a state board in another state early in my career, I know that many of them impose indirect costs in terms of red tape, compliance with regulations that do little good, time and money spent responding to information requests to keep staff busy and amused and chronic headaches for the people inside and outside of government who are forced to spend time interacting with them. Some of them protect the interests of the professions they are supposed to oversee rather than protecting the public. I have this notion that we should pile up all the rules & regs, agencies and agencies and sub-agencies within agencies, layers of management, services, public assistance etc. and then figure out which 20% accomplish 80% of public benefit for the state; which means dumping 80% and still retaining 80% of the total public benefit.