How does this consumer affairs meeting help consumers?

Three hundred members of state regulatory boards and 200 state staffers have descended on Los Angeles for four days of meetings aimed at raising the profile consumer affairs programs in the state.

But some participants are grumbling that having hundreds of people flying and driving to the conference is a stunt to promote the department that the state, with its budget in far the red, cannot afford.

"Why are we doing this when the state has a deficit? It’s wasteful," said a member of one state board, speaking on condition of anonymity because she is not authorized to speak for the board.. Carrie Lopez, director of the California Department of Consumer Affairs, said the Consumer Trust Summit that ends Saturday at the Westin Los Angeles Airport Hotel provides consumers access to the boards, and has members of different boards working together with law enforcement.

"We’ve been able to leverage a lot of the work we do and take it to a new level," she said.

Meetings today are being held by the Board of Registered Nursing, Veterinary Medical Board, Board of Accountancy, Acupuncture Board, Board of Pharmacy and Board of Optometry. Department spokesman Luis Farias argued that the conference is saving taxpayers money. All state boards are required to meet at least once in Northern California and once in Southern California each year, something that normally costs $70,000 annually, while having them all use one meeting space this week is costing $20,000, Farias said. However, many of the panels, including the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, the Athletic Commission and the Acupuncture Board have already held at least one Southern California meeting this year. Farias could not say how much the board members and staff are spending on flights and hotels.

-- Patrick McGreevy

Comments

[John Vertido]

I participated in this summit as a board member and I found the experience valuable to both me and the consumers of California. This summit allowed other board members to interact for the first time in my memory, we were able to exchange ideas, observe new procedures and most importantly be visible and accessible to the general public. The main advantage for the general public was access to the information on many topics of consumer interest at one location. They could also interact with those who have the responsibility to respond to consumer complaints, meet them face to face and ask the important question "Why..." In a time of tight budgets, this meeting of the few, was able to serve the many, by providing a "one stop" location to gather needed information and meet those responsible for the regulation of those many professions. This also allowed people the opportunity to attend multiple board and commission meetings that would otherwise require multiple trips to various locations throughout the state over a long period of time. Because of this event, consumers will be better protected.

[Bill Wilcox]

This conference did nothing to help consumers. Obviously we won't know if any of the interactions between the various boards bears any fruit for some time, but I for one doubt it. The public is invited to attend any board meeting, and as mentioned in the article, the boards are mandated to hold meetings in southern and northern California at least once a year. Most of the boards hold more than the statutory minimum. This is all easily verifiable on the board's website. Also, the cost quoted in the article is obviously significantly lower than the actual cost. It also would be interesting to know whether any of these board meeting were more well attended than any of the regularly held meetings, but again I doubt the state is interested in attempting to measure results in any meaningful way.

[Suzanne McCormick]

The Summit allowed for an invaluable exchange of information and ideas from stakeholders and board members alike. Having a forum where all Boards and Bureaus participated led to reaffirmation of the recognition in the value of the license as well as the importance of protecting the public. It was enjoyable to be able to interact with members of other Boards and Bureaus and to glean new ideas and tools to better serve the people of California. For example, the Dental Bureau participated in a discussion along with the Pharmacy and Medical Board concerning e-prescribing of medications, with presentations by stakeholders and the public. It is only in a forum such as the Summit, that such a concise and direct, clear information exchange would be possible, for having three separate Board/Bureau meetings discussing the same issue may have resulted in information exchange, yet clearly not the same as to all three groups at the same time. I would encourage the continuance of this forum and look forward to a Summit next year.