BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1083|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1083
Author: Eggman (D)
Amended: 3/26/15 in Assembly
Vote: 27
SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/16/15
AYES: Allen, Anderson, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-0, 6/29/15
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-1, 5/18/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Political Reform Act of 1974: local enforcement
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill permits the City Council of the City of
Stockton and the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) to
enter into an agreement that provides for the FPPC to enforce a
local campaign finance ordinance passed by the City Council of
the City of Stockton.
ANALYSIS:
Existing Law:
1) Creates the FPPC, and makes it responsible for the
impartial, effective administration and implementation of
the Political Reform Act (PRA).
AB 1083
Page 2
2) Requires a local government agency that adopts or amends a
local campaign finance ordinance to file a copy of the
ordinance with the FPPC.
3) Prohibits a local government agency from enacting a
campaign finance ordinance that imposes campaign reporting
requirements that are additional to or different from those
set forth in the PRA for elections held in its jurisdiction
unless the additional or different requirements apply only
to the candidates seeking election in that jurisdiction,
their controlled committees or committees formed or existing
primarily to support or oppose their candidacies, and to
committees formed or existing primarily to support or oppose
a candidate or to support or oppose the qualification or
passage of a local ballot measure which is being voted on
only in that jurisdiction, and to city or county general
purpose committees active only in that city or county,
respectively.
4) Authorizes the FPPC, until January 1, 2018, upon mutual
agreement between the FPPC and the San Bernardino County
Board of Supervisors, to have primary responsibility for the
impartial, effective administration, implementation, and
enforcement of a local San Bernardino County campaign
finance reform ordinance. Requires the San Bernardino County
Board of Supervisors to consult with the FPPC prior to
adopting and amending any local campaign finance reform
ordinance that is subsequently enforced by the FPPC.
5) Authorizes the FPPC, pursuant to the aforementioned
agreement, to investigate possible violations of the San
Bernardino County campaign finance reform ordinance and
bring administrative actions against persons who violate the
ordinance, as specified.
6) Permits the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors and
the FPPC to enter into any agreements necessary and
appropriate for the operation of these provisions, including
agreements for reimbursement of state costs with county
funds, as specified. Permits the San Bernardino County
Board of Supervisors or the FPPC, at any time, by ordinance
or resolution, to terminate any agreement for the FPPC to
administer, implement, or enforce the local campaign finance
reform ordinance or any provision thereof.
AB 1083
Page 3
7) Requires the FPPC to report to the Legislature with
specified information on or before January 1, 2017, if the
FPPC enters into such an agreement with the San Bernardino
County Board of Supervisors.
This bill:
1) Provides that, upon mutual agreement between the FPPC and
the City Council of the City of Stockton, the FPPC is
authorized to assume primary responsibility for the
impartial, effective administration, implementation, and
enforcement of a local campaign finance ordinance passed by
the City Council of the City of Stockton. Provides that the
FPPC is authorized to be the civil prosecutor responsible
for the civil enforcement of such an ordinance. Provides
that as the civil prosecutor, the FPPC may do both of the
following:
a) Investigate possible violations of the local
campaign finance reform ordinance; and,
b) Bring administrative actions in accordance with the
PRA and the administrative adjudication provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act.
2) Requires any local campaign finance reform ordinance of
the City of Stockton that is enforced by the FPPC to comply
with the PRA.
3) Requires the City Council of the City of Stockton to
consult with the FPPC prior to adopting and amending any
local campaign finance reform ordinance that will be
enforced by the FPPC.
4) Permits the City Council of the City of Stockton and the
FPPC to enter into any agreements necessary and appropriate
to carry out the provisions of this bill, including
agreements pertaining to any necessary reimbursement of
state costs with city funds for costs incurred by the FPPC
in administering, implementing, or enforcing a local
campaign finance reform ordinance pursuant to the provisions
of this bill.
AB 1083
Page 4
5) Prohibits an agreement entered into pursuant to the
provisions of this bill from containing any form of a
cancellation fee, liquidated damages provision, or other
financial disincentive to the exercise of the right to
terminate the agreement, except that the FPPC may require
the City Council of the City of Stockton to pay the FPPC for
services rendered and any other expenditures reasonably made
by the FPPC in anticipation of services to be rendered
pursuant to the agreement if the City Council of the City of
Stockton terminates the agreement.
6) Permits the City Council of the City of Stockton or the
FPPC to terminate, at any time, by ordinance or resolution,
any agreement made pursuant to this bill for the FPPC to
administer, implement, or enforce a local campaign finance
reform ordinance or any other provisions thereof.
7) Requires the FPPC, if an agreement is entered into
pursuant to the provisions of this bill, to report to the
Legislature on or before January 1, 2019, and submit that
report in compliance with current law. Requires the FPPC to
develop the report in consultation with the City Council of
the City of Stockton.
8) Requires the report to include, but not be limited to, all
of the following:
a) The status of the agreement;
b) The estimated annual cost savings, if any, for the
City of Stockton;
c) A summary of relevant annual performance metrics,
including measures of utilization, enforcement, and
customer satisfaction;
d) Public comments submitted to the FPPC or the City of
Stockton relative to the operation of the agreement; and,
e) Legislative recommendations.
9) Contains a January 1, 2020 sunset date.
AB 1083
Page 5
10) Makes legislative findings and declarations as to the
necessity of a special statute for City of Stockton due to
the need to avoid an appearance of corruption in the city's
electoral process.
Background:
San Bernardino County Contract with the FPPC. In 2012, the
Legislature enacted AB 2146 (Cook, Chapter 169, Statutes of
2012), which permitted San Bernardino County and the FPPC to
enter into an agreement that provides for the FPPC to enforce
the County's local campaign finance reform ordinance. Prior to
this, the FPPC did not enforce any local campaign finance
ordinances. According to previous analyses, the County of San
Bernardino, which had been the subject of several high-profile
corruption cases, was in the process of developing a campaign
finance ordinance. Rather than appoint an ethics commission,
which could present financial as well as conflict of interest
challenges, the County proposed to contract with the FPPC to
enforce their local campaign finance ordinance. Moreover, the
County determined that it was in the best interest of the County
to retain the services of the FPPC to provide for the
enforcement and interpretation of San Bernardino County's local
campaign finance ordinance as the FPPC has special skills,
knowledge, experience, and expertise in the area of enforcement
and interpretation of campaign laws necessary to effectively
advise, assist, litigate, and otherwise represent the County on
such matters. As a result, the FPPC and San Bernardino County
entered into a mutual agreement, from January 1, 2013 through
December 31, 2014, for the FPPC to provide the County campaign
enforcement and interpretation services for the impartial,
effective administration, implementation, and enforcement of San
Bernardino's campaign finance reform ordinance. According to
the FPPC, San Bernardino County and the FPPC have entered into a
new two-year mutual agreement.
Local Campaign Ordinances and the PRA. Under existing law,
local government agencies have the ability to adopt campaign
ordinances that apply to elections within their jurisdictions,
though the PRA imposes certain limited restrictions on those
local ordinances. For instance, SB 726 (McCorquodale, Chapter
1456, Statutes of 1985) limited the ability of local
jurisdictions to impose campaign filing requirements that
AB 1083
Page 6
differed from those in the PRA, permitting such requirements
only when they applied solely to candidates and committees whose
activity is restricted primarily to the jurisdiction in
question. This provision sought to avoid the necessity of a
candidate or committee active over a wider area being required
to adhere to several different campaign filing schedules.
Similarly, AB 1430 (Garrick, Chapter 708, Statutes of 2007),
prohibited local governments from adopting rules governing
member communications that are different than the rules that
govern member communications at the state level.
Aside from these restrictions, however, local government
agencies generally have a significant amount of latitude when
developing local campaign finance ordinances that apply to
elections in those agencies' jurisdictions. Any jurisdiction
that adopts or amends a local campaign finance ordinance is
required to file a copy of that ordinance with the FPPC, and the
FPPC posts those ordinances on its website. Several cities and
counties have adopted campaign finance ordinances, some of which
are very extensive.
In some cases, those ordinances include campaign contribution
limits, reporting and disclosure requirements that supplement
the requirements of the PRA, temporal restrictions on when
campaign funds may be raised, and voluntary public financing of
local campaigns, among other provisions. In many cases, local
campaign finance ordinances are enforced by the district
attorney of the county or by the city attorney. In at least a
few cases, however, local jurisdictions have set up independent
boards or commissions to enforce the local campaign finance
laws.
The FPPC does not currently enforce any local campaign finance
ordinances other than San Bernardino County's. The FPPC can and
does, however, bring enforcement actions in response to
violations of the PRA that occur in campaigns for local office,
even in cases where the local jurisdiction brings separate
enforcement actions for violations of a local campaign finance
ordinance.
Criminal, Civil, and Administrative Enforcement of the PRA and
Local Campaign Ordinances. Violations of the PRA are subject to
administrative, civil, and criminal penalties. Generally, the
Attorney General (AG) and district attorneys have responsibility
AB 1083
Page 7
for enforcing the criminal provisions of the PRA, though any
elected city attorney of a charter city also has the authority
to act as the criminal prosecutor for violations of the PRA that
occur within the city. The FPPC, the AG, district attorneys,
and elected city attorneys of charter cities all have
responsibility for enforcement of the civil penalties and
remedies provided under the PRA, depending on the nature and
location of the violation, while any member of the public also
has the ability to file a civil action to enforce the civil
provisions of the PRA, subject to certain restrictions.
The FPPC has the sole authority to bring administrative
proceedings for enforcement of the PRA. When the FPPC
determines on the basis of such a proceeding that a violation of
the PRA has occurred, it can impose monetary penalties of up to
$5,000 per violation, in addition to ordering the violator to
cease and desist violation of the PRA and to file any reports,
statements, or other documents or information required by the
PRA. In the case of local campaign ordinances, there is no
single approach as to the types of penalties that are available
for the violations of those ordinances. Many local ordinances
provide for misdemeanor or civil penalties for violations, while
some ordinances do not establish any penalties for violations.
In some local jurisdictions that have independent boards or
commissions to enforce the local campaign finance ordinances,
those boards or commissions have the authority to bring
administrative enforcement proceedings, similar to the authority
the FPPC has under the PRA.
Comments:
1)According to the author, this bill seeks to amend the
Political Reform Act of 1974 in order to authorize the FPPC to
enter into an agreement with the City of Stockton to enforce
campaign contribution limits.
There is an ongoing, national debate about the role money plays
in campaigns, and particularly the effect that large
contributions have on candidates once they are elected.
Candidates for elected office typically rely on money to fund
effective campaigns; the amount and source of those donations
can vary greatly. The City of Stockton currently imposes no
limits on donations by individuals to campaigns for city
AB 1083
Page 8
offices, so the City Council is considering the adoption of a
municipal ordinance setting individual campaign donation
limits.
The city does not have the resources to oversee and enforce such
an ordinance, but the FPPC has, through past legislation,
arranged with the County of San Bernardino to do just that.
This bill would simply allow the City of Stockton to make the
same mutual arrangement with the FPPC.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, all
administration and enforcement costs to the FPPC will be
reimbursed by the City of Stockton (Local Fund).
SUPPORT: (Verified6/29/15)
None received
OPPOSITION: (Verified6/29/15)
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-1, 5/18/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang,
Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle,
Dodd, Eggman, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo
Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove,
Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones,
Jones-Sawyer, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein,
Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte,
O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Rodriguez,
Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting,
Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins
NOES: Ridley-Thomas
NO VOTE RECORDED: Daly, Frazier, Kim, Mathis, Melendez
AB 1083
Page 9
Prepared by:Darren Chesin / E. & C.A. / (916) 651-4106
7/1/15 14:53:18
**** END ****