BILL NUMBER: AB 906	INTRODUCED
	BILL TEXT


INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Members Hill and Smyth

                        FEBRUARY 26, 2009

   An act to amend Section 1092 of the Government Code, relating to
conflict of interest.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 906, as introduced, Hill. Conflict of interest: statute of
limitations.
   Existing law prohibits Members of the Legislature, and state,
county, district, judicial district, and county officers or employees
from being financially interested in any contract made by them in
their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they are
members. A contract made in violation of any of these provisions may
be avoided at the instance of any party except the officer interested
in the contract. Existing law provides that the applicable statute
of limitations for commencing an action to avoid a contract under
this provision is 4 years after the plaintiff has discovered, or in
the exercise of reasonable care should have discovered, the
violation.
   This bill would specify that the provision specifying the
applicable statute of limitations for commencing that act applies to
an action that was in violation of that prohibition and that was
discovered, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have been
discovered on or after January 1, 2003.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 1092 of the Government Code is amended to read:

   1092.  (a)  Every   A  contract made in
violation of  any of the provisions of  Section 1090
may be avoided at the instance of any party except the officer
interested therein.  No such   The 
contract  may   shall not  be avoided
because of the interest of an officer therein unless the contract is
made in the official capacity of the officer, or by a board or body
of which  he or she  the officer  is a
member.
   (b) An action under this section shall be commenced within four
years after the plaintiff has discovered, or in the exercise of
reasonable care should have discovered, a violation described in
subdivision (a). 
   (c) The changes made to this section by Chapter 68 of the Statutes
of 2007 shall apply to an action that was in violation of Section
1090 and that was discovered, or in the exercise of reasonable care
should have been discovered, on or after January 1, 2003.