BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1190
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB
1190 (Jackson)
As Amended August 29, 2016
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE: 23-12
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Natural |6-3 |Williams, Cristina |Jones, Hadley, |
|Resources | |Garcia, Gomez, |Harper |
| | |McCarty, Mark Stone, | |
| | |Wood | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Appropriations |11-7 |Gonzalez, Bloom, |Bigelow, Calderon, |
| | |Bonilla, Bonta, |Chang, Gallagher, |
| | |Eggman, Eduardo |Jones, Obernolte, |
| | |Garcia, Holden, Quirk, |Wagner |
| | |Santiago, Wood, Chau | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Prohibits, with some exceptions, commissioners at the
SB 1190
Page 2
Coastal Commission (Commission) from conducting ex parte
communications on matters within the Commission's jurisdiction.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires, on or before July 1, 2017, the Commission provide
for public access to all commission meetings via telephone and
the Internet.
2)Requires Commission staff to include in the executive summary
section of a staff report a list of references to any
materials submitted for the public record that are determined
not relate to a matter within the Commission's jurisdiction,
including information about how to locate copies of those
materials in an addendum.
3)Excludes from the definition of ex parte communication any
communication conducted by a commission member while acting in
his or her capacity as a local government official and prior
to the time the matter to which the communication applies was
pending before the Commission.
4)Authorizes commissioner and Commission staff to conduct a
project site visit if the proposed site visit is approved by a
majority vote of the Commission and with the permission of the
property owner.
5)Requires disclosure of ex parte communications that are a
violation of the law and prohibits a commissioner from voting
or participating in a Commission matter if he or she has had
an ex parte communication.
6)Requires the Commission to adopt a board policy that prohibits
a commissioner or alternative from using or attempting to use
SB 1190
Page 3
his or her official position to place undue influence on
Commission staff.
7)Disqualifies a commissioner from holding a position at the
Commission if they willfully violate the policy established by
the Commission.
EXISTING LAW, pursuant to the Coastal Act:
1)Permits any person to testify at a Commission hearing,
workshop, or other official proceeding, or submit written
comments for the record on a matter before the Commission.
2)Requires any person who applies to the Commission for approval
of a development permit to provide the Commission with the
names and addresses of all persons who, for compensation, will
be communicating with the Commission or its staff on the
applicant's behalf or on behalf of the applicant's business
partners. Requires that disclosure to be provided to the
Commission prior to any such communication.
3)Defines an "ex parte communication," for the purposes of
communications related to actions of the Commission, as any
oral or written communication between a commissioner and an
interested person about a matter within the Commission's
jurisdiction which does not occur in a public hearing,
workshop, or other official proceeding, or that is not on the
record at such a proceeding.
4)Prohibits an ex parte communication unless the commissioner
fully discloses the communication.
SB 1190
Page 4
5)Requires commissioners to disclose and make public any ex
parte communication by providing a full report of the
communication to the executive director within seven days of
the communication or, if the communication occurs within seven
days of the next Commission hearing, to the Commission on the
record of the proceeding at that hearing.
6)Requires the Commission to adopt standard disclosure forms for
reporting ex parte communications, which shall include:
a) The date, time, and location;
b) Identity of the person who made the communication and
the people who were present during the communication;
c) A complete, comprehensive description of the content of
the communication, including all material that was part of
the communication.
7)Defines an "interested person" as a) any applicant,
applicant's agent or representative, or participant in a
Commission proceeding, b) any person with a financial interest
in a matter before the Commission his or her agent or
employee, or c) a representative acting on behalf of any
civic, environmental, neighborhood, business, labor, trade, or
similar organization who intends to influence the decision of
a commissioner.
8)Prohibits a commissioner who has knowingly had an ex parte
communication that has not been reported as required from
voting on the matter or influencing the Commission in any way.
Provides that knowing violations of the disclosure or recusal
requirements can result in fines of up to $7,500 and a court
order for the Commission to revoke its action and rehear the
matter.
SB 1190
Page 5
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: Ex parte communications refer to any communication
made in private (i.e., off the record and without notice and
opportunity for all parties to participate) between an
interested party in a decision-making process and any state
official in a decision-making position. Ex parte communication
disclosure requirements for state policy makers are intended to
provide the public with information regarding a decision and to
prevent bias in decision makers. Prior to 1992, there was no
mention of ex parte communications in the Coastal Act. There
were claims of frequent unreported ex parte communications at
the Commission. Then Assemblymember Terry Friedman authored AB
3459, Chapter 1114, Statutes of 1992 and AB 909, Chapter 798,
Statutes of 1993 to prohibit ex parte communications. These
laws were interpreted as prohibiting ex parte communication
unless they are fully disclosed.
In 2014, AB 474 (Stone), Chapter 125, Statutes of 2014, improved
ex parte communications reporting requirements. The additions
to the reporting requirements included the identity of the
person on whose behalf the communication was made; the identity
of all persons present during the communication; and a complete,
comprehensive description of the content of the ex parte
communication, including a complete set of all text and graphic
material that was part of the communication. However, concerns
remain about ex parte communications at the Commission. Many of
the ex parte communications submitted to this Committee are not
comprehensive, and news accounts state some commissioners have
not filed ex parte disclosure forms for their ex parte
communications. There have been accounts of commissioners
filing brief disclosure forms and then sending staff detailed
e-mails about their ex parte communications creating a
discrepancy in the public record. Commissioners also commonly
disclose on the microphone at Commission meetings. The oral
disclosures are usually an extremely short account of the
communication. Finally, it is difficult for the public to have
SB 1190
Page 6
access to the ex parte communication disclosure forms.
The Commission voted 6-5 this year to support banning ex parte
communications, and in their support letter they state,
"Commissioners have expressed concerns that the practice lacks
transparency, undermines due process, and erodes public trust in
the commission. Some have stated that they would prefer not to
conduct ex partes, but feel pressured to do so because the
practice is so widespread. The general conclusion is that the
current process leads to an 'uneven' level of information
available to the public."
Analysis Prepared by:
Michael Jarred / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092 FN:
0004980