BILL ANALYSIS
AB 9
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 9 (John A. Perez)
As Introduced December 1, 2008
Majority vote
ELECTIONS 6-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fong, Bill Berryhill, | | |
| |Coto, Mendoza, Saldana, | | |
| |Swanson | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Specifies that a payment of public moneys by a state
or local government agency for a communication regarding a
ballot measure is an expenditure for the purposes of the
Political Reform Act (PRA) unless certain conditions are met.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Provides that an "expenditure," for the purposes of the PRA,
includes the payment of public moneys by a state agency or
local government agency, or by an agent of that agency, for a
communication to the electorate within the jurisdiction of
that agency regarding a clearly identified measure, unless
either of the following applies:
a) The information in the communication constitutes a fair
and impartial presentation of relevant facts relating to
the measure; or,
b) The communication is otherwise required by law.
2)Provides that for the purposes of this bill, a communication
clearly identifies a measure if either of the following
applies:
a) In the case of a measure that has qualified to be placed
on the ballot:
i) The communication states a proposition number,
official title or popular name associated with the
measure; or,
AB 9
Page 2
ii) The communication refers to the subject matter of
the measure and either states that the measure is before
the people for a vote or, taken as a whole and in
context, unambiguously refers to the measure.
b) In the case of a measure that has not qualified to be
placed on the ballot, if the communication refers to the
subject matter of the measure and to the qualification
drive.
EXISTING LAW makes it unlawful for any elected state or local
officer to use or permit others to use public resources for a
campaign activity.
FISCAL EFFECT : Keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "Existing law states that no
agency or department of the state may use its publications to
advise state employees of any constitutional officer's choice of
candidates for public office or for recommending positions on
specific ballot propositions not related to the functions of
that agency or department. (Elections Code Section 18390.) This
past election cycle concerns were raised that some local
agencies were blurring the line between providing information
and "advocating" on behalf of certain measures on the ballot.
In Los Angeles, the LA Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) has
posted a page on its website devoted to the Measure R half-cent
sales tax increase campaign. It stopped short of urging people
to vote for Measure R but said of transit resources, "more is
needed" to reduce traffic congestion. Under pressure, MTA
removed the [Web page]. Similar concerns were raised by the
Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) on campaigns across
the state. In order to address this issue, AB 9 clarifies
existing law that an expenditure includes the payment of public
moneys by a state agency or local government agency, or by an
agent of that agency, for a communication to the electorate
within the jurisdiction of that agency regarding a clearly
identified measure, except if the communication constitutes a
fair and impartial presentation of the facts relating to the
measure or the communication is otherwise required by law."
At its December 2008 meeting, the FPPC adopted a regulation that
is substantially similar to the policy proposed by this bill.
That regulation provides that a payment of public moneys by a
AB 9
Page 3
state or local government agency, or by an agent of the agency,
for communications directed to the voters of the jurisdiction,
about a measure are considered an expenditure unless the
information provided constitutes a fair and impartial
presentation of the facts related to the measure. Because the
FPPC has already adopted a regulation that is substantively
identical to this bill, the need for this bill is unclear.
California voters passed an initiative, Proposition 9, in 1974
that created the FPPC and codified significant restrictions and
prohibitions on candidates, officeholders, and lobbyists. That
initiative is commonly known as the PRA. Amendments to the PRA
that are not submitted to the voters generally must further the
purposes of the initiative and require a two-thirds vote of both
houses of the Legislature. However, the Office of the
Legislative Counsel has concluded that this bill is declaratory
of existing law, and as such does not make an amendment to the
PRA. As a result, this bill has been keyed as a majority vote
bill.
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094
FN: 0000555