Engelmann

Introduction

In this case we face a variation on the recurrent theme of executive agencies seeking to implement “house rules” unfettered by any outside constraints—rules sometimes called “underground regulations.” (See Armistead v. State Personnel Board (1978) 22 Cal.3d 198, 205 [ 149 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 583 P.2d 744 ]; Grier v. Kizer (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 422, 440 [ 268 Cal.Rptr. 244 ].) Article IX, section 7.5 of the California Constitution succintly provides that “The State Board of Education [Board] shall adopt textbooks for use in grades one through eight throughout the State, to be furnished without cost as provided by statute.” The central question in this case is whether this delegation of constitutional authority to the Board renders all its rules and procedures for adopting textbooks beyond the reach of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). (See Gov. Code, § 11370; Stats. 1980, ch. 204, § 7, p. 434.) The trial court ruled that it did not. We agree and shall hold that short of its power to make the ultimate selection among textbooks, the Board is no different than any other executive agency, and thus the governing procedures and criteria it develops for the purpose…