A bill that could provide full insight to compensation packages for executives in the California State University and University of California systems was approved by the Assembly Higher Education Committee on Tuesday.

The bill, the Higher Education Governance Accountability Act, passed with a unanimous 6-0 vote. It came after a tumultuous period within the CSU system, during which students protested fee hikes and members of the California Faculty Association (CFA) threatened to strike if a salary negotiation with the CSU Board of Trustees wasn’t reached.

Many of the students and faculty members believe that the reason fees increased and teachers weren’t receiving raises is due to members of the administration being paid excessively, thus creating a disparity in how much money was going into the school system and how much of that money made it past the administration.

The bill, which was introduced by Democratic Sen. Leland Yee of San Francisco and San Mateo, aims to allow the public to be present when the CSU Trustees and UC Regents vote on administrative pay. Previously, the CSU and the UC have authorized payouts for administrators and not disclosed this information in their public records.

“It will require all executive compensation packages to be voted on in public, both at the sub-committee level and at the full board level,” said Adam J. Keigwin, Communications Director for Sen. Yee.

While the Brown Act, which pertains to local government, allows boards to have closed meetings when discussing personnel issues, the proposed bill will eliminate any loopholes that the CSU and the UC might try to use to enact closed session meetings. As a result, members of the public will be allowed to attend meetings where such topics are discussed. Additionally, it will allow for public comment to be heard at the time of the vote, and require the CSU and UC to fully divulge and explain all the details of compensation, including salary, perks and retirement packages.

The bill calls in to account the Bagley-Keene Act, which necessitates open meetings be held for boards, commissions and agencies at the state level in California. While the CSU and the UC systems have always been required to hold open meetings, according to Sen. Yee’s office, they have not always upheld the mandate.

“It will put both systems at par with the Bagley-Keene Act and go one step farther,” Keigwin said.

Keigwin said the governing boards of the CSU and the UC have expressed concerns over the proposed legislation and how it will change the way the boards operate, but so far it has been approved without a single no-vote.

“There hasn’t been any formal opposition,” Keigwin said. “We’ve been able to move it quite overwhelmingly.”

The CSU Office of Public Affairs agreed that the bill is beneficial to everyone involved.

“We think that it is a good bill and we’re working with the author,” said Clara Potes-Fellow, director of media relations. “It reaffirms current law and practice at the CSU.”

Before it is made a law, SB 190 still has to be heard before the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee as well as the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Pending approval, it will then be voted upon on the assembly floor in late July. Supporters of the bill tout it as a checks and balances setup that will regulate the spending of money within the two university systems.

“I think the biggest benefiters will be the students and the taxpayers,” Keigwin said. “When we pay our taxes and when students pay their tuition, their fees, they expect it to be used wisely.”