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