BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1431
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Bob Wieckowski, Chair
AB 1431 (Gonzalez) - As Amended: April 8, 2014
As Proposed to be Amended
SUBJECT : School Administrators: Political Reform Act
KEY ISSUE : Should an Administrator of a school district or
community college district be prohibited from soliciting or
receiving political campaign contributions on behalf of a
candidate for the district board, or any other elected office of
the district that employs the administrator?
SYNOPSIS
This bill would amend the Political Reform Act in order to
address conflicts of interest that may arise when the
administrator of school district or community college district
solicits funds for a candidate that is running for a seat on the
school or community college district board, or any elected
office of the district that employs the administrator. The
author is particularly concerned about administrators soliciting
funds from third party vendors or other businesses that may have
reason to contract with the school at some point in the future.
Administrators, the author notes, manage contracts and,
conceivably, could make recommendations to the board that would
result in granting contracts to campaign donors. The author
cites, for example, public corruption cases involving the
Sweetwater Unified School District, where prosecutors alleged
that a "common thread" in the corruption cases was administrator
fundraising on behalf of board members. This measure,
therefore, would prohibit a school or community college district
administrator from knowingly soliciting, accepting, or receiving
a political contribution from any person for a candidate for any
elected official of the district that would employ the
administrator, except as specified. The bill would require the
Fair Political Practices Commission to enforce the provisions of
this bill. Because the bill would amend provisions of the
Political Reform Act, a constitutional initiative, should the
bill pass out of this Committee and the Appropriations
Committee, it will require a two-third vote on the Assembly
Floor. The bill passed out the Assembly Elections and
AB 1431
Page 2
Redistricting Committee on a 5-1 vote.
SUMMARY : Prohibits an administrator of a school district or
community college district from soliciting political
contributions, as specified. Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits an administrator of a school district or of a
community college district from knowingly soliciting,
accepting, or receiving a political contribution for the
campaign of an elected official of the district employing the
administrator, or for a candidate for an office of the school
district or community college district employing the
administrator.
2)Specifies that the above prohibition does not apply to an
administrator who is soliciting, accepting, or receiving a
contribution for his or her own campaign for an office of a
school district or community college district.
3)Finds and declares that this bill furthers the purpose of the
Political Reform Act of 1974.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prohibits a public official, at any level of state or local
government, from in any way attempting to use his or her
official position to influence a governmental decision in
which he or she knows or has reason to know he or she has a
financial interest. (Government Code Section 87100.)
2)Prohibits the use of school district or community college
district funds, services, supplies, or equipment for the
purpose of urging the support or defeat of any candidate,
including, but not limited to, any candidate for election to
the governing board of the district. However, the
administrative officer of a board member of a school district
or community college district may appear before a citizen's
group, upon request, to discuss the reasons why the board
called an election to submit to the voters a proposition for
the issuance of bonds and for purposes of answering questions
from the citizen's group. (Education Code Section 7054.)
3)Prohibits a person who holds, or who is seeking election or
appointment to, the governing board of a school district or
community college district from using, or promising or
AB 1431
Page 3
threatening to use, the power of office to positively or
adversely affect any person's compensation or position within
the district based on the vote or political activities of that
person. (Education Code Section 7053.)
4)Permits officers or employees of a school district or
community college district to solicit or receive political
funds or contributions to promote support or defeat of a
ballot measure that would affect the rate of pay, hours of
work, retirement, civil service, or working conditions of the
officers or employees. (Education Code Section 7056.)
5)Prohibits a local candidate from knowingly, directly or
indirectly, soliciting a political contribution from any
employees of his or her agency or from a person on an
employment list of that agency. (Government Code Section
3205.)
6)Provides that a public official shall not be financially
interested in any contract made by them in their official
capacity, or by a body or board of which they are a member.
(Government Code Section 1090.)
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS : Although California's Political Reform Act of 1974 is
primarily a disclosure law, some of its provisions, as well as
some Government Code provisions that fall outside of the Act,
contain provisions that impose limits on the ability of public
employees to engage in political fundraising or to use the
authority or influence of their positions to affect a political
outcome. (See e.g. Government Code Sections 3201-3209.) Other
provisions of the Government Code prohibit the use of state
resources for campaign activities. (See e.g. Government Code
Sections 8314 and 54964.) Perhaps more relevant to the concerns
that prompted this bill, provisions of the Education Code
constrain the political activities of officers and employees of
school districts and community college districts. For example,
existing law prohibits the use of district funds, supplies, or
other resources to promote or oppose a political candidate, and
persons seeking election to a school district or community
college board cannot promise or threaten to use the power of the
office to positively or adversely affect any person's
compensation or position within the district based on the vote
AB 1431
Page 4
or political activities of that person. (Education Code
Sections 7053 and 7054.)
According to the author, however, existing restrictions do not
adequately prevent many kinds of conflicts of interest that, the
author contends, have occurred in California's public school
districts and community college districts. In particular, the
author has in mind situations in which an administrator of a
district raises campaign contributions for board members, or
other elected officials, of the same district that employs the
administrator. Such arrangements could pose problems in the
working relationship between the administrator and the board
members, especially if there were an expectation that the
administrator's job security were somehow linked to his or her
willingness to engage in fundraising. Even more problematic,
the author believes such arrangements could affect the process
by which boards select contractors who perform works of
improvement or vendors who provide other services for the
district. Because administrators manage contracts and make
authoritative recommendations to the board, an administrator
could recommend granting contracts to campaign donors. While
existing conflict of interest rules would clearly prohibit a
board member conditioning the award of a contract upon the
giving of a campaign contribution, such transactions might be
harder to trace if the contributions were funneled through an
administrator. As an example of how fundraising can cause
conflicts, the author cites recent public corruption cases
involving the Sweetwater Unified School District, where
prosecutors alleged that a "common thread" in those cases was
administrator fundraising on behalf of board members.
This bill, therefore, would amend the Political Reform Act in
order to address the kinds of conflicts of interest that may
arise when the administrator of a school district or community
college district engages in fundraising on behalf of a candidate
for the board of the same district that employs the
administrator. Specifically, this measure would prohibit an
administrator of a school district or community college district
from "knowingly soliciting, accepting, or receiving a
contribution for the campaign of an elected official of the
school district or community college district [that employs] the
administrator." The bill would not, however, prohibit an
administrator from raising contributions for his or her own
campaign for an office of the district, as such a rule would
effectively prohibit administrators from seeking such offices.
AB 1431
Page 5
Penalties and Enforcement : The bill amends the Political Reform
Act of 1974 and requires the Fair Political Practices Commission
to enforce the bill's provisions. Although the bill does not
specify any penalties for the specific offense created by the
bill, the Political Reform Act generally provides that
violations can generate civil or administrative fines of up to
$5,000 per violation or, in the case of knowing or willful
violations of the provisions of the bill, fines and penalties of
up to $10,000 per violation. Violations can also result in
misdemeanor charges brought by local prosecutors.
The Definition of "Administrator :" As noted in the analysis of
the Assembly Committee on Elections and Redistricting, the
committee of first referral, the bill does not contain a
definition of "administrator." Somewhat surprisingly, although
the word "administrator" is used throughout the Education Code,
there is apparently no definition that identifies precisely
which positions within a school district or community college
district are considered to be an administrator. A search for
"administrator" in the Education Code brings up 306 sections
that use the word, but none, it seems, provide a definition.
(There is a definition for "third party administrator," but that
merely is defined as a contractor who performs administrative
duties.) Given that the Education Code has governed our state
for some time now, there must be some general understanding
among the educational community as to who gets counted as an
administrator. To the extent that it proves necessary, the
author may wish to work with the Education Committee or other
knowledgeable stakeholders to develop, apparently for the first
time, a definition for this critical term in the Education Code,
should the bill move out of this Committee.
Hatch Act and Proposed Author Amendment : As currently in print,
this bill contains an exemption that would permit an
administrator to solicit funds from a person who was a member of
the same employee organization. This provision was based on the
author's initial efforts to track a provision of the federal
Hatch Act that prohibited federal employees from soliciting
contributions, unless the person making the contribution was a
member of the same labor organization as the federal employee.
However, the Hatch Act is not an entirely apt model. For
example, the Hatch Act applies to all "employees," whereas this
bill only applies to "administrators," who clearly have much
more influence on administrative decisions than other employees.
AB 1431
Page 6
In addition, the Hatch Act incorporates other qualifications to
the exemption that do not translate well to the circumstances
envisioned by this bill. Most notably, under the Hatch Act, the
federal employee may only raise contributions for fellow union
members if the funds are raised for a multi-candidate campaign
committee, whereas this bill necessarily envisions raising money
for an individual candidate for a single office, not for a
campaign committee.
Therefore, the author will take the following amendment in this
Committee :
- On page 3, delete "unless the contributor" on line 34,
and delete lines 35 -36 entirely.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : "AB 1431," the author writes, "seeks to
prohibit administrators at school and community college
districts from soliciting funds for the campaigns of candidates
- including incumbents - for the board elections to govern the
districts where they are employed." Citing reports about
corruption that was linked, at least in part, to administrators
soliciting campaign funds for board members, the author contends
that this bill "will reduce the real and perceived conflicts of
interest that are created by this dynamic and have contributed
to these major corruption scandals in California's school
districts and community college districts." The author contends
that, currently, "there are no statewide regulations governing
the financing and fundraising of board elections at school and
community college districts, which has created an environment in
many California schools and college districts where
administrators exert inappropriate influence over their own job
security with the boards that hired them as well as the process
for selecting contractors to rebuild and revamp the districts'
campuses."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION (Unless Amended) : The Association of
California School Administrators (ACSA) opposes this bill unless
amended. ACSA contends that while the Legislature can limit
political donations, it cannot ban the arranging of campaign
contributions. ACSA also expresses concern that the bill only
applies to "administrators" and not to other "employees."
According to ACSA, if "the argument is that there is undue
influence over their job security the same can be argued for
both certificated and classified employees of a district." In
addition, ACSA believes the limitation to administrators ignores
AB 1431
Page 7
"the efforts made by teachers and classified employee unions to
influence elections of school board members who also make the
final decisions on employment contracts, benefits, dismissals,
layoffs, etc." ACSA, therefore, suggests that the bill should
be amended "to place the same prohibitions on all employees of a
school district, not just administrators." Finally, ACSA points
out that "school administrators can be parents or grandparents
of students within the district. They have an interest in the
leadership of the school board who sets the education policy of
the district. AB 1431 removes the ability of those individuals
from participating in the democratic process in order to help
their children who are students within the same district."
It should be noted, however, that ACSA does not provide legal
authority on point for its legal assertion that the Legislature
is legally barred from seeking to ban the arranging of campaign
contributions by administrators solely in regard to the campaign
of an elected official of the district employing the
administrator, or for a candidate for an office of the school
district or community college district employing the
administrator. In addition, the bill makes clear that this
narrowly tailored prohibition does not apply to an administrator
who is soliciting, accepting, or receiving a contribution for
his or her own campaign for office.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file
Opposition
Association of California School Administrators (unless amended)
Analysis Prepared by : Thomas Clark / JUD. / (916) 319-2334