The motives or understandings of individual legislators who voted for a statute are not to be considered in construing the statute.  This is true even when the legislator who authored the bill purports to offer an opinion.  There is no guarantee that those who supported the bill shared the author’s view of its meaning.  A contrary rule would allow an individual legislator to characterize an enactment in ways he or she might have preferred or intended but for which there was not sufficient legislative support. Unless a statute or the constitution otherwise provide, an administrative agency may act by the vote of the majority of a quorum at the agency meeting.  Thus, the five-member State Water Resources Control Board could take action by a majority of two board members at a meeting attended by three board members, the number set by statute as required for a quorum to conduct control board business.  A section requiring a majority of all members of the control board applied only to any final action by the board after a single board member conducts a hearing or investigation.

California Supreme Court (Corrigan, J.); May 7, 2018; 2018 Cal. LEXIS 3160