BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  AB 41
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 6, 2011

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                   AB 41 (Hill) - As Introduced:  December 6, 2011 

          Policy Committee:                              ElectionsVote:7-0 
          (Consent)

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill expands reporting and other requirements of the 
          Political Reform Act (PRA), for members of the High-Speed Rail 
          Authority (HSRA), to match the requirements placed on other 
          specified high-ranking public officials. Specifically, this 
          bill:

          1)Requires an HSRA member having a financial interest in a 
            decision before the authority to publicly identify the 
            financial interest that gives rise to the conflict of 
            interest, to recuse himself or herself from discussing or 
            voting on the matter, and to leave the room until after 
            discussion and disposition of the matter is concluded.  

          2)Expands the amount of information that an HSRA member must 
            disclose on their statement of economic interests (SEI).

           FISCAL EFFECT 

          Minor absorbable costs to the Fair Political Practices 
          Commission (FPPC) for enforcement of more stringent PRA 
          provisions being applied to HSRA members, potentially offset by 
          fine revenues.

           COMMENTS  

           1)Background  .  Currently the PRA subjects certain high-ranking 
            public officials (known as "87200 filers"- Section 87200 of 
            the Government Code) to the most expansive disclosure 
            requirements under the PRA. This includes elected state 
            officers, judges, members of the Public Utilities Commission, 








                                                                  AB 41
                                                                  Page  2

            the FPPC, and the California Coastal Commission, members of 
            county boards of supervisors, district attorneys, mayors, and 
            members of city councils, among others. These officers must 
            file periodic SEIs disclosing their investments, interests in 
            real property, and income (including gifts), and an 87200 
            filer who has a financial interest in a governmental decision 
            must do all of the following immediately prior to the 
            consideration of a matter in which the filer has a conflict of 
            interest:

             a)   Publicly identify the financial interest that gives rise 
               to the conflict of interest in detail sufficient to be 
               understood by the public.

             b)   Recuse himself or herself from discussing and voting on 
               the matter.

             c)   Leave the room until after the discussion, vote, and any 
               other disposition of the matter is concluded, unless the 
               matter is placed on the portion of the agenda reserved for 
               uncontested matters.

            Members of the HSRA are currently included among public 
            officials subject to PRA reporting and disclosure requirements 
            somewhat less stringent than those outlined above, pursuant to 
            Section 83700 of the Government Code.

           2)Purpose  . The author argues that HSRA members should be held to 
            the same Section 87200 disclosure standards as are members of 
            comparable state bodies. The author cites an October 2010 Los 
            Angeles Times article finding that certain HSRA members 
            received more than $10,000 - under state law, the threshold 
            for disclosing sources of outside income - from the 
            special-interest clients in recent years, yet the potential 
            conflicts involving some of those clients have not always been 
            recognized or publicly disclosed members at HSRA meetings.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081