The Alfred E. Alquist Seismic Safety Commission (SSC) works with federal, state, and local agencies and the private sector to lower earthquake risk to Californians. The 20 appointed commissioners advise the governor, Legislature, school districts and citizens on earthquake risk management, safety, and other issues. The commission also maintains and updates the state’s five-year Earthquake Loss Reduction Plan, reviews earthquake and tsunami safety procedures, develops and publishes information needed to improve building structures, prepares guides about safe public and residential buildings, and follows new and emerging technologies that can improve safety. While the mission of the commission may seem benign, it is actually highly political because the agency’s recommendations can influence the spending of billions of dollars on seismic retrofitting of buildings and planning to deal with tsunamis. The commission will transition from the State and Consumer Services Agency to the new Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency by July 1, 2013, as part of an executive branch reorganization proposed by Governor Jerry Brown.

The Alfred E. Alquist Seismic Safety Commission is named for a state politician who served in the Legislature for more than 33 years. Alfred Ernest Alquist was committed to conservation and the environment, education reform and other major issues—including seismic safety. Among the many bills he authored was a 1969 attempt to establish a committee for seismic safety, which failed, and a more successful bill that set up a joint committee in the California Legislature to discuss seismic safety. After a devastating earthquake hit the San Fernando Valley in 1971, Alquist introduced the Hospital Seismic Safety Act, passed in 1972, followed by 1974’s Seismic Safety Act—the bill that created the Seismic Safety Commission on January 1, 1975.

In its original form, the commission had 15 members appointed by the governor and two additional members, one each appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and the Speaker of the Assembly.  The Seismic Safety Act specified that the commission represent “the professions of architecture, planning, fire protection, public utilities, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, structural engineering, soils engineering, geology, seismology, local government, insurance, social services, emergency services, and the Legislature and that such representation serves the public interest.” 

By law, the commission was to exist only until 1976, but another large earthquake—this one near Oroville, striking on August 1, 1975—spurred action. The SSC launched an investigation of the quake and its damage and split in to five subcommittees to research the safety of public schools, hospitals, hazardous construction, and more. Senator Alquist introduced a bill extending the commission to 1981, while the independent Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended the commission be eliminated. (That recommendation was not acted upon.)

The commission issued guidelines for retrofitting pre–1933 buildings (1933 being the year of a major earthquake in Long Beach, after which some rules about construction to mitigate earthquake dangers were implemented), then it waded into a controversy about putting a liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility at Point Conception. Although it had no authority over federally-designed and built dams, the commission monitored a proposed new dam in California and made recommendations. Other reviews and reports followed, and legislation bolstered the commission’s authority to conduct hearings and research, and propose policy.

Alquist remained a champion of the commission, extending its “sunset date” to 1986 and finding funding for it when Governor Jerry Brown excluded the SSC from his 1979-1980 budget. In 1980, a 5.8 magnitude earthquake damaged the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories in Northern California, and the federally-funded laboratories agreed that the independent SSC would review the structural safety of its buildings. More earthquakes in the 1980s brought attention and research to mobile homes and private school safety, and the dangers of unreinforced masonry structures. The SSC made recommendations and supported legislation that addressed many of these issues. In the midst of this, Alquist managed to make the commission permanent.

The California Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, modeled on a federal program, began its first five-year plan in 1986, after legislation mandated the SSC to devise and administer the program. SSC liaisoned with the U.S. Geologic Survey, and especially since the 1994 Northridge quake, worked with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other agencies to evaluate resources and schedules to reduce the hazard from earthquakes.

“The occurrence of natural disasters profoundly affects the persuasiveness of opposing interpretations of risk.” This sentence, from the SSC’s 25^th anniversary report, describes how earthquakes—both in California and in other countries—open a window of opportunity and spurs lawmakers to implement recommendations, sometimes after years of research by the SSC.

The 1994 Northridge earthquake prompted further recommendations, although Governor Pete Wilson considered folding the commission into another agency during that time. His administration felt reports took too long to generate, while commissioners let it be known that they were frustrated that many of their suggestions were not acted upon.

In 1991, the SSC expanded its studies to include tsunamis, since they are generated by earthquakes. By the 1990s, the SSC studied not only earthquakes and building standards, but how cities could recover from major disasters. A 1997 report to the governor, California Earthquake Loss Reduction Plan, won Wilson’s endorsement, and many of its strategies were implemented.

In the last 15 years, more and more attention has been focused on hazard reduction before an earthquake occurs. Recommendations about buildings, utilities, transportation and emergency response are studied and turned into policy.

Alquist died in March 2006. The Seismic Safety Commission was named for him that same year by Senate Bill 1278. That bill also enlarged the commission by three members, and put it under the State and Consumer Services Agency. In addition to the Seismic Safety Commission, a technologically innovative state building in San Jose is also named for Alquist, and the Alfred E. Alquist State Building, completed in 1980 and still in use, was a model for energy efficient design for years. The Legislature made its changes even as Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was agitating for elimination of the commission; he had initially vetoed an attempt to extend its sunset provisions beyond June 2007.

The month after Alquist died, and shortly after the state marked the 100^th anniversary of the devastating San Francisco earthquake, Schwarzenegger took another run at the commission. Two of his aides told two members of the panel—including U.S. Geological Survey seismologist Lucy Jones, famous for her calming appearances on television after Southern California temblors—that they were being removed immediately. Hours later, the decision was rescinded.

The commission, which is primarly funded through fees collected on insurance policies sold in the state, has long been the bane of powerful monied interests in the state. The commission's recommendations often influence how billions of dollars are spent on building retrofits and tsunami planning.

The commission is scheduled to expire on July 1, 2012, unless its sunset provisions are extended again.

Biographical History (Collection Guide, Alfred E. Alquist Papers)

8870.2.c. of The Seismic Safety Act (Seismic Safety Commission website) (pdf)

A History of the California Seismic Safety Commission (pdf)

State Quake Commission Given a Jolt (by Sharon Bernstein, Los Angeles Times)

The Alfred E. Alquist Seismic Safety Commission’s main mission is to reduce earthquake risk to Californians. This is accomplished by bringing experts together to study earthquake risk management, safety, emergency response, building and construction innovations and standards, infrastructure stability, local agency planning, coordination between agencies, and much more. The commission advises the governor, Legislature, local agencies and the private sector on its findings; it prepares maps, pamphlets and reports, and suggests legislation.

The Seismic Safety Commission is made up of 20 commissioners, all experts in their fields. Those fields include architecture, planning, fire protection and emergency services, public utilities, electrical and mechanical engineering, soils engineering and geology, seismology, local government, insurance, social services, and the state Legislature. Commissioners are appointed for roughly four years—they do not leave their posts until a successor is chosen, so the term is not exact. Fifteen of the commissioners are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate. One is appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and another by the Speaker of the Assembly. In addition, a representative from the Building Standards Commission, the State Architect’s office, and the California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) are included on the commission. The commissioners elect their own chairs and vice chairs.

The commission’s work is carried out by committees that investigate specific issues. Currently, there are three committees: the Planning and Budget Committee, the Public School Safety and Field Act Ad Hoc Committee, and the Strong Motion Instrumentation Advisory Committee (SMIAC), which was established by law to advise the California Geological Survey about long term operation and goals.

The commission meets several times a year; at least 10 commissioners must be present for a quorum. The agendas and minutes are available online. In addition, the day to day work is carried out by a staff of seven professionals, led by an executive director.

Much of the commission’s work is study and review. They review seismic activities funded by the state of California, conduct public hearings on seismic safety issues, review (and sometimes propose) earthquake-related legislation, and recommend earthquake safety programs, both to government agencies and the private sector. The commission investigates any earthquakes that occur in the state, evaluating the damage and reconstruction efforts with an eye toward lessons learned. Earthquake and tsunami safety policies and programs are constantly evaluated and updated.

In addition, the commission manages the state’s Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program—an ongoing project that evaluates the resources necessary to significantly reduce earthquake hazards. New technologies, funding sources and lessons learned from earthquakes around the world are incorporated into the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, sometimes called the Earthquake Loss Reduction Program. A part of this program is the distribution of funds for study, funneled through the Earthquake Research and Projects Program.

Publications that result from all this study are available from the commission website. They include maps of the state’s hazard zones, earthquake faults and tsunami inundation areas, as well as preparedness and earthquake safety guides for homes and businesses. Web pages provide specialized information on earthquakes and tsunamis. Since volcanoes can also cause earthquakes, and since California has over 500 volcano vents, “What to do if a Volcano Erupts” and other instructional webpages are also available.

2011 Annual Report (pdf)

Day-to-day activities of the Alfred E. Alquist Seismic Safety Commission are funded through the state’s Insurance Fund ($1.2 million), which collects a fee levied on the sale of insurance policies sold in the state.

The proposed 2012-13 budget also includes $2 million from a special fund established in 2007 to be spent solely on the Earthquake Research and Projects Program. The non-state funds are part of a $6.5 million settlement reached through the courts between insurance companies and the Department of Insurance as a consequence of the 1994 Northridge earthquake and dissolution of the California Research Assistance Fund (CRAF). The program’s funds are spent on projects for earthquake risk reduction approved by the commission.

The commission spends $823,000 on salaries and benefits and $412,000 on operating expenses and equipment.

In 2011, the commission approved the following projects:

$300,000 for a partnership with PBS television to encourage emergency preparedness.

$300,000 toward a collaborative project with universities and industry groups to assess fire safety and structural integrity of healthcare facilities after an earthquake.   

$250,000 for Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) to develop an engineering template to be used by public schools to apply for $199.5 million in Prop 1D (Seismic Retrofit Funds).

$75,600 to co-fund at Lake Tahoe the use of a new remote operating vehicle (a remote controlled submarine) that needed to be field tested before being sent to its research site in Antarctica. Data will be pertinent to seismic hazards in the Lake Tahoe basin.

$49,900 for an interagency survey of hospitals in New Zealand, Mexico, and El Centro, California about post earthquake response and evacuations. 

$49,000 for Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) to conduct a study on the fire risk following earthquakes.

3-Year Budget (pdf)

2007 Annual Report (pdf)

2011 Annual Report (pdf)

Commission Funding Questioned

The Seismic Safety Commission relied on state General Fund money for most of its early history, but that changed in 2002 when charges against the gross receipts of insurers of commercial and residential properties took its place.

Those fees were scheduled to expire in July 2012 because of sunset provisions in the law, so Governor Jerry Brown proposed making the fees permanent. That is probably illegal, according to the state Legislative Analyst’s Office. Proposition 26, passed by voters in 2010, now requires that fees like those that support the commission and myriad other government entities be considered a tax and receive two-thirds approval from the Legislature.

Prop. 26 was approved by 52.6% of the voters after Chevron, Philip Morris and business associations poured millions of dollars into the campaign. Labor unions and environmental groups opposed the proposition.

The commission’s budget is relatively small, with only $1.3 million paid for from the insurance fund; another $2 million comes from designated special funds for an ongoing seismic safety program are not at risk. But with the state still facing billions of dollars of debt, every decision to tap the General Fund is problematic.  

State Funding for Quake Safety Oversight at Risk (by Will Evans, California Watch)

Summary of LAO Findings and Recommendations on the 2012-13 Budget (Legislative Analyst’s Office)

Former Commissioner Lends Voice to 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists

J. Marx Ayres, a nationally-recognized expert in mechanical and electrical engineering, served on the California Seismic Safety Commission, as well as on other state boards and committees from the local to the federal level. His credentials make him a sought-after consultant and expert witness, which is why his opinion on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11 made headlines.

Ayres endorsed the findings of  Steven Jones, whose “research indicates that the World Trade Center skyscrapers were destroyed not as a result of the impact of airplanes, but rather the result of intentional, controlled demolitions using precisely timed detonations of pre-planted explosives,” according to Alan Miller in OpEdNews. Miller is also author of the website PatriotsQuestion911.com. A lengthy statement from Ayres is posted on many blogs that question the official findings of the 9/11 Commission.

Ayres’ opinion is pretty clear. An oft-quoted paragraph from his statement reads: “I support the work of Dr. Steven Jones. He has provided a scientific foundation for the collapse of the three World Trade Center (WTC) towers. I read the FEMA September, 2002 report, prepared by the American Society of Civil Engineers, and initially accepted their theory of the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. As more information became available on the web, I was motivated to research the subject in a more rigorous manner. I have carefully studied the Jones 2006 paper, “Why indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?” and concluded that it is a rational step-by-step study that meets the accepted standards for scientific building research. His critical reviews of the FEMA, NIST, and 9/11 Commission reports are correct. I have signed his petition calling for the release of all U.S. Government-held information regarding the events of 9/11/2001.”

Ayres compared the work of Dr. Jones to that of Dr. Linus Pauling’s leadership in opposing the development of the hydrogen bomb. The Seismic Safety Commission website makes no mention of Ayres or his controversial endorsement.

Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement (by Alan Miller, OpEdNews.com)

Curriculum Vitae (JMAyres.com)

World Trade Center 9/11/01 Disaster (JMAyres.com)

Public School Safety in Earthquakes

After a major earthquake centered in Long Beach destroyed 70 schools and damaged another 120 in 1933, the state quickly passed the Field Act. The Field Act, still in effect, imposes standards on the design and construction of schools and enforces those standards with independent review and inspection, so that schools will protect students during an earthquake.

In 2009, Corey G. Johnson, a reporter on assignment from CaliforniaWatch, procured a list of 9,000 public schools in California that were rejected for Field Act safety certification. Almost immediately—once the information had been requested—schools started dropping off the list, their building infractions changed to “minor paperwork violations.” Over the next 19 months, Johnson uncovered a scandalous disregard for safety violations and an uncomfortably close relationship between the state architect’s office and the school construction industry. Many agencies and inspectors had simply looked the other way, and all bear some of the blame for an alarming lack of safety in California’s public schools.

Once the articles on this came to light, the Seismic Safety Commission, together with a committee from the State Allocation Board and staff at the state architect’s office and the Office of Public School Construction, presented two proposals that would clear the way for many schools to access a pot of funding for needed repairs. The money—a $200 million bond fund—had been available but restrictions kept schools from using it. Schools were required to prove their buildings would experience unusually high ground shaking force in an emergency. The new proposals would allow state officials to declare a school project unsafe using other criteria, and then the funds could be allocated. The proposals were dropped when the Legislature took up the problem.

Even if the fund is disbursed, major problems remain. “The seismic mitigation fund has less than $200 million available and the state estimated it would cost $4.7 billion to retrofit all the school buildings suspected of being seismically unsafe,” wrote Kendall Taggart.

Prompted by the CaliforniaWatch reports, state Senate Majority Leader Ellen M. Corbett led the call for an audit of the state architect’s office. That audit has been completed. “State auditors found that the state architect’s office rarely used the enforcement tools it possesses, didn’t adequately document the safety issues it identified and didn’t prioritize projects with safety concerns. The report also noted breakdowns in the state’s oversight of inspectors,” according to CaliforniaWatch.

The reporter Johnson planned to attend a March 8, 2012, meeting of the Seismic Safety Commission meeting, at which the Chester Widom, newly-appointed (as of January 2012) State Architect would present the auditor’s report. The minutes of that meeting have not yet been published. Widom appeared at a January 2012 meeting of the Seismic Safety Commission and had promised future action on the report. By that time, months after Johnson’s initial report, CaliforniaWatch said, “More than 16,000 school projects currently lack Field Act certification and at least 59,000 more have yet to be fully reviewed by the state architect’s office to identify their Field Act Status.”

 The Field Act (Section 7, Student Safety, DGS website)

On Shaky Ground: The Story Behind the Story (by Corey G. Johnson, CaliforniaWatch)

Thousands of Vulnerable School Buildings Could Vie for Seismic Funding (by Kendall Taggart, CaliforniaWatch)

State Architect: Fixing Seismic Oversight for Schools a ‘High Priority’ (by Corey G. Johnson, CaliforniaWatch)

Concrete Buildings a Long-Standing Danger in Earthquakes

“California has failed to identify and retrofit thousands of brittle concrete buildings despite years of warnings from scientists that the structures are highly vulnerable to collapse during a major earthquake,” wrote Rong-Gong Lin II and Sam Allen in the Los Angeles Times, shortly after major earthquakes hit Japan and New Zealand in 2011.

“Experts estimate that between 25,000 to 30,000 concrete buildings were erected before building codes were strengthened in the mid-1970s,” the article continued. Called non-ductile concrete buildings, the greatest danger is that large slabs of concrete fall on people during a quake. “They’re killers,” Caltech professor of engineering seismology Thomas Heaton told the Times. “When they fail, the failures are just unsurvivable. You just end up with a pile of floor slabs, one on top of another.”

The Seismic Safety Commission lists “upgrading of existing vulnerable structures” as a key component in its California Earthquake Loss Reduction Plan. “Upgrade vulnerable buildings to acceptable performance levels” and “Provide incentives to retrofit” are part of the Plan Matrix. The Plan itself calls for incentives and education to induce owners and agencies to upgrade facilities, with priority given to “essential services buildings, public and private schools, single- and multifamily housing, parking structures, and facilities housing hazardous materials.” If aggressive retrofitting strategies are put in place, there will be “significant reductions in loss of life, property damage, and business interruptions.”

“The state of California should take the lead in motivating and initiating the strategies and in implementing them for state-owned buildings,” the report reads, though it admits that the “cost to state and local jurisdictions . . . will be considerable. Retrofit costs to the state, school districts, local governments, and other property owners will be significant and will vary depending on the effectiveness of design and the incentives.”

For incentives, the plan suggests “alternative funding, reduced insurance rates, tax benefits, and extended longevity of the property function.”

The plan ranks the identification of these public and private buildings and mitigating the  earthquake hazard as “Critically important,” adding that “the most vulnerable and the most essential buildings should be addressed as the highest priority.”

“But lawmakers have taken little action,” reported the Times. The article then quoted Executive Director Richard McCarthy: “Given the economic situation now, no one has got any money to do it.”

California Has Failed to Identify Thousands of Buildings Vulnerable to Quakes (by Rong-Gong Lin II and Sam Allen, Los Angeles Times)

California Earthquake Loss Reduction Plan (pdf)

A New Funding Source

Legislation establishing the Seismic Safety Commission in 1975 has a sunset clause that must be periodically renewed or funding for the agency, and the agency itself, expires. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed renewing the sunset provision in 2006, but later relented. Governor Jerry Brown’s 2012-13 budget proposed that the law be changed to remove the sunset provision, set to go off July 1, 2012, and permit the continued funding of the commission through a fee assessed on insurance policies issued in the state.

When the independent Legislative Analyst’s Office reviewed the governor’s proposal, it consulted the Office of Legislative Counsel and came back with some bad news for the governor. The legislative counsel said the fee was unconstitutional because it represented a tax:

“The commission provides a broad public benefit rather than a direct benefit to the insurers paying the charges. Such a tax would not be permissible because Article XIII, Section 28(f), of the Constitution states that with limited exceptions the state’s insurance tax (one of the General Fund's major revenue sources) shall be in lieu of all other state and local taxes on insurers.”

The legislative analyst recommended that the Legislature reject the governor’s proposal and consider funding the commission directly from the General Fund, although the office said it was unclear whether other existing Insurance Fund fee sources might be used.

And then, in an ominous note, the legislative analyst hinted that perhaps the commission should just be defunded. “In a year when the state faces difficult choices in balancing the General Fund budget, the Legislature then would need to evaluate funding for the commission in relation to other state priorities such as health, education, social services, corrections, and other programs.” 

An Act to Amend Section 12975.9 of the Insurance Code (Department of Finance) (pdf)

Summary of LAO Findings and Recommendations on the 2012-13 Budget (Legislative Analyst’s Office)

L. Thomas Tobin, 1985-1995. After 10 years, Tobin resigned to pursue a career as a private consultant following issuance of a report on the 1994 Northridge earthquake that blamed lax enforcement of current building codes for much of the damage. While he claimed there were no political reasons behind his resignation, rumors swirled that Governor Pete Wilson’s administration was unhappy that the report was delayed for months because the commission’s experts could not reach consensus on its recommendations.

Richard A. Andrews, 1982-1985

Robert A. Olson, 1975-1982. Bob Olson, one of the first commissioners, was selected to be executive director at the commission’s first meeting.