BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                            



           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       AB 1090|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
                                           
                                    THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 1090
          Author:   Fong (D)
          Amended:  8/29/13 in Senate
          Vote:     27

           
           SENATE ELECTIONS & CONST. AMEND. COMMITTEE  :  4-1, 7/2/13
          AYES:  Torres, Hancock, Padilla, Yee
          NOES:  Anderson

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8
           
          ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  58-13, 5/31/13 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Conflicts of interest:  contracts

           SOURCE  :     Fair Political Practices Commission


           DIGEST  :    This bill authorizes the Fair Political Practices  
          Commission (FPPC) to bring civil and administrative enforcement  
          actions for violations of Government Code Section 1090 (Section  
          1090), dealing with conflicts of interest in contracts, and  
          requires the FPPC to provide opinions and advice with respect to  
          Section 1090.

           Senate Floor Amendments  of 8/29/13 exempt from Section 1090  
          specified contracts and officers of "landowner" special  
          districts; clarify the procedures that the FPPC must follow and  
          conditions under which they may issue advice or opinions  
          regarding Section 1090 and related statutes; delete language  
          that provided that if the FPPC compelled a person to testify in  
                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          2

          an enforcement proceeding for an alleged violation of Section  
          1090 after that person claimed the privilege against  
          self-incrimination, the person could not be prosecuted on  
          account of any transaction, act, matter, or thing concerning  
          which he/she was compelled to testify, and instead prohibit any  
          testimony or testimonial evidence that the person produced from  
          being used against the person in a prosecution; and make  
          technical and corresponding changes.

           ANALYSIS  :    

          Existing law:

          1. Prohibits members of the Legislature and state, county,  
             district, judicial district, and city officers or employees,  
             pursuant to Section 1090, 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.  Prohibits  
             state, county, district, judicial district, and city officers  
             or employees from being purchasers at any sale made by them  
             in their official capacity, or from being vendors at any  
             purchase made by them in their official capacity.

          2. Provides that a person who willfully violates Section 1090 is  
             punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 or by  
             imprisonment in the state prison, and is forever disqualified  
             from holding any office in the state.  

          3. Provides that a contract made in violation of Section 1090  
             may be voided by any party to the contract, except for the  
             officer who had an interest in the contract in violation of  
             Section 1090.

          This bill:

           1. Prohibits the FPPC from commencing an investigation that  
             might lead to an administrative or civil action against a  
             person for a violation of Section 1090 except upon written  
             authorization from the district attorney of the county in  
             which the alleged violation occurred.

           2. Provides that any opinion or advice that is issued by the  
             FPPC with respect to a person's duties under Section 1090 is  
             subject to the following:

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          3


              A.    The FPPC is prohibited from issuing opinions or advice  
                relating to past conduct;

              B.    The FPPC shall forward a copy of the request for an  
                opinion or advice to the Attorney General (AG) and the  
                local district attorney prior to proceeding, and shall  
                provide to the person who made the request with a copy of  
                any written communications that the FPPC received from the  
                AG or district attorney; and

              C.    Any opinion or advice issued by the FPPC may be  
                offered as evidence of good faith conduct by the requester  
                in an enforcement proceeding, but the opinion or advice is  
                not admissible by any person other than the requester in a  
                criminal proceeding, and the FPPC shall indicate this fact  
                in the text of the advice or opinion. 

           1. Provides that any decision issued by the FPPC in an  
             administrative action brought in response to an alleged  
             violation of Section 1090 is not admissible in any  
             enforcement proceeding other than one brought by the FPPC,  
             and requires the FPPC to indicate this fact in the text of  
             any such decision.

           2. Permits a civil violation of Section 1090 to be punishable  
             by a fine of the greater of $10,000 or three times the value  
             of the financial benefit received by the person, instead of  
             being capped at three times the value of the financial  
             benefit.

           3. Specifies that, for the purposes of Section 1090, a person  
             is not deemed to be interested in a contract for public  
             services entered into by a special district that requires a  
             person to be a landowner or a representative of a landowner  
             to serve on the board of which the officer or employee is a  
             member, provided that the contract is on the same terms and  
             conditions as if he/she were not a member of the body or  
             board. Provide that for the purposes of this provision,  
             "public services" includes the powers and purposes generally  
             provided pursuant to provisions of the Water Code relating to  
             irrigation districts, California water districts, water  
             storage districts or reclamation districts.


                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          4

           4. Requires the FPPC to investigate possible violations of  
             Section 1090 upon receipt of a sworn complaint from a person.  
              Permits the FPPC to investigate possible violations of  
             Section 1090 on its own initiative.  Requires such  
             investigations to be conducted pursuant to procedures that  
             govern FPPC investigations for potential violations of the  
             Political Reform Act (PRA).

           5. Prohibits the FPPC from commencing an administrative action  
             against a person for a violation of Section 1090 if the FPPC  
             has commenced a civil action against that person for the same  
             violation.  Prohibits the FPPC from commencing a civil action  
             against a person for a violation of Section 1090 if the FPPC  
             has commenced an administrative action against that person  
             for the same violation.


           6. Requires the FPPC to follow the procedures that apply to  
             administrative actions brought for violations of the PRA when  
             bringing an administrative action for a violation of Section  
             1090 pursuant to the provisions of this bill.

           7. Permits the FPPC to obtain a judgment in superior court for  
             the purpose of collecting any unpaid monetary penalties,  
             fees, or civil penalties imposed pursuant to this bill.   
             Provides that the procedures for obtaining such a judgment  
             for collecting unpaid penalties or fees for a violation of  
             the PRA shall apply to any action by the FPPC to obtain a  
             judgment for unpaid penalties or fees for a violation of  
             Section 1090.

           8. Permits the FPPC to apply to the clerk of the superior court  
             for a judgment to collect penalties imposed by an FPPC  
             enforcement order for a violation of Section 1090, in lieu of  
             filing a small claims or civil case with the court to collect  
             those penalties, pursuant to the following:

              A.    Provides that if the time for judicial review of a  
                final FPPC order or decision for a violation of Section  
                1090 has lapsed, or if all means of judicial review of the  
                order of decision have been exhausted, the FPPC may apply  
                to the clerk of the court for a judgment to collect the  
                penalties imposed by the order or decision, or the order  
                as modified in accordance with a decision on judicial  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          5

                review.

              B.    Requires the application to the clerk of the court to  
                include a certified copy of the order or decision, or the  
                order as modified in accordance with a decision on  
                judicial review, and proof of service of the order or  
                decision.  Provides that the application constitutes a  
                sufficient showing to warrant issuance of the judgment to  
                collect the penalties.  Requires the clerk of the court to  
                issue the judgment immediately.

              C.    Provides that an application to the clerk of the court  
                for a judgment to collect penalties imposed by an FPPC  
                enforcement order shall be made to the clerk of the  
                superior court in the county where the monetary penalties,  
                fees, or civil penalties were imposed by the FPPC.

              D.    Provides that a judgment entered pursuant to these  
                provisions has the same force and effect as a judgment in  
                civil action.

              E.    Provides that the remedy provided in this bill is in  
                addition to those available under existing law.

           Background
           
           Overview of Section 1090  .  Section 1090 generally prohibits a  
          public official or employee from making a contract in his/her  
          official capacity in which he/she has a financial interest.  In  
          addition, a public body or board is prohibited from making a  
          contract in which any member of the body or board has a  
          financial interest, even if that member does not participate in  
          the making of the contract.  Violation of this provision is  
          punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or imprisonment in the  
          state prison, and any violator is forever disqualified from  
          holding any office in the state.  The prohibitions against  
          public officers being financially interested in contracts that  
          are contained in Section 1090 date back to the second session of  
          the California Legislature (Chapter 136, Statutes of 1851).

          Various provisions of state law provide exceptions to, or  
          limitations on, Section 1090.  Among other provisions, state law  
          provides that an officer shall not be deemed to be financially  
          interested in a contract if the officer has only a "remote  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          6

          interest" in the contract and if certain other conditions are  
          met.  Similarly, another section of state law provides that an  
          officer or employee is not deemed to be interested in a contract  
          if his/her financial interest meets one of a number of different  
          enumerated conditions.

          Given the complexity of Section 1090, and the various exceptions  
          to and limitations on that section, it can be extremely  
          difficult for a public board or body to determine whether or not  
          a member of that board or body has an impermissible financial  
          interest in a contract made by the board or body.  The AG and  
          county district attorneys (DAs) have enforcement authority over  
          Section 1090, but neither the AG nor the county DAs typically  
          give legal opinions on the application of that section.  Public  
          officials may be able to receive an opinion from the legal  
          counsel to the board or body of which they are a member, but  
          such an opinion does not provide the same legal protection to  
          the public official.

           Conflict of interest rules in the PRA .  In addition to the  
          conflict of interest laws found within Section 1090 that apply  
          to contracting decisions made by governmental entities, the PRA  
          also has separate conflict of interest laws that apply more  
          broadly to all governmental actions.  Generally, these  
          provisions prohibit a public official from making, participating  
          in making, or in any way attempting to use his/her official  
          position to influence a governmental decision in which the  
          official knows or has reason to know that he/she has a financial  
          interest, as defined.  Any public official who knowingly or  
          willfully violates these conflict of interest rules can be  
          charged criminally.  Civil and administrative enforcement  
          actions may also be brought against an individual for a  
          violation of these conflict of interest rules.  The FPPC has  
          sole authority to bring an administrative enforcement action  
          under the PRA, and the FPPC also has the authority to bring  
          civil enforcement actions under certain circumstances.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/30/13)

          Fair Political Practices Commission (source)
          California Common Cause

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          7


           OPPOSITION :    (Verified  8/30/13)

          Association of California Water Agencies

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author:  

            In 1974, California voters passed Proposition 9, a measure  
            that enacted comprehensive conflict of interest laws designed  
            to ensure that public officials would perform their duties in  
            an impartial manner, among other provisions.  That measure,  
            commonly known as the Political Reform Act, also created the  
            FPPC, and made it primarily responsible for enforcing those  
            conflict of interest laws.  Under the PRA, a public official  
            generally is prohibited from making or participating in the  
            making of any governmental decision in which the official  
            knows or has reason to know that he or she has a financial  
            interest.

            The conflict of interest laws in the PRA apply broadly to all  
            types of governmental decisions.  There is a separate conflict  
            of interest law, however, that applies only to contracting  
            decisions.  Government Code Section 1090 generally prohibits a  
            public official or employee from making a contract in his or  
            her official capacity in which he or she has a financial  
            interest.  In addition, a public body or board is prohibited  
            from making a contract in which any member of the body or  
            board has a financial interest, even if that member does not  
            participate in the making of the contract.  Unlike the  
            conflict of interest rules contained in the PRA, however, the  
            FPPC does not have a role in enforcing Government Code Section  
            1090.  Instead, enforcement actions may be brought only by the  
            Attorney General or by the district attorney in the county in  
            which the violation occurred.  Furthermore, unlike the PRA,  
            which can be enforced through criminal, civil, or  
            administrative actions, Government Code Section 1090 can be  
            enforced only through criminal prosecutions.

            Because contracting decisions fall within the broader conflict  
            of interest rules contained in the PRA, however, the FPPC  
            nonetheless can and does bring enforcement actions under the  
            PRA for conflicts of interest that arise in the context of  
            contracting decisions.


                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          8

            The existence of multiple conflict of interest laws that are  
            enforced by multiple entities create unnecessary confusion for  
            public officials and hamper efforts to effectively enforce the  
            state's strict conflict of interest rules.

            AB 1090 improves enforcement of the state's conflict of  
            interest laws by allowing the FPPC to bring civil or  
            administrative enforcement actions in response to violations  
            of the Government Code Section 1090 contracting laws, and  
            gives public officials an additional tool in helping to avoid  
            conflicts of interest by allowing the FPPC to issue advice  
            regarding a public official's obligations under Government  
            Code 1090.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The Association of California Water  
          Agencies states:

            AB 1090 would make a person who violates Section 1090 of the  
            Government Code, or who causes another person to violate or  
            who aids and abets another person in violating the  
            prohibition, subject to administrative and civil fines.  The  
            bill would authorize the Fair Political Practices Commission  
            to enforce these violations by bringing an administrative or  
            civil action against a person who is subject to the  
            prohibition.

            We believe that Government Code section 1090 currently  
            provides for strong safeguards against financial abuse by  
            government officials and public employees when entering into  
            contracts on behalf of a public agency.  Adding the threat of  
            administrative and civil fines to the current threat of jail  
            time seems unnecessary.  If a local government official or  
            employee is going to willfully violate the law, the prospect  
            of going to jail is likely much more of a deterrent than an  
            administrative fine.  If the law is violated in error, without  
            the intent to gain a financial benefit, currently the District  
            Attorney (DA) can make a determination on whether the case  
            should be pursued.  Often the DA will not pursue a case  
            because it is clear that the person did not intend to violate  
            the law.  We believe that AB 1090 would merely add  
            opportunities for government officials and public employees to  
            be fined which is much easier to accomplish than pursuing a  
            criminal case.


                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1090
                                                                     Page  
          9


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  58-13, 5/31/13
          AYES:  Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Blumenfield, Bocanegra,  
            Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon,  
            Campos, Chau, Chesbro, Cooley, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong,  
            Fox, Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray,  
            Hall, Roger Hernández, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder,  
            Lowenthal, Maienschein, Medina, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin,  
            Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez,  
            Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting,  
            Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
          NOES:  Achadjian, Allen, Chávez, Dahle, Donnelly, Beth Gaines,  
            Grove, Harkey, Jones, Logue, Mansoor, Patterson, Wagner
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Bigelow, Conway, Gorell, Hagman, Holden,  
            Melendez, Olsen, Wilk, Vacancy


          RM:k  8/30/13   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****























                                                                CONTINUED