BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1673
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1673 (Garcia)
As Amended April 9, 2014
2/3 vote
ELECTIONS 6-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fong, Donnelly, Mullin, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Hall, Perea, Rodriguez | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| | | |Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| | | |Holden, Jones, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, |
| | | |Weber |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Provides that a payment made by an occupant of a home
or an office who is a lobbyist, lobbying firm, or lobbyist
employer for costs related to a meeting or fundraising event
held in the occupant's home or office is considered a
"contribution" under the Political Reform Act of 1974 (PRA),
regardless of the costs for the meeting or fundraising event.
Specifically, this bill exempts events held in the home or
office of a lobbyist, lobbying firm, or lobbyist employer from a
provision of law that provides that a payment made by an
occupant of a home or an office for costs related to any meeting
or fundraising event held in the occupant's home is not
considered a contribution if the costs for the meeting or
fundraising event are $500 or less.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, minor absorbable costs to the Fair Political
Practices Commission (FPPC) for enforcement, potentially offset
to some extent by penalty revenues.
COMMENTS : The PRA, among other things, requires candidates and
committees to disclose contributions made and received and
expenditures made in connection with campaign activities. The
term "contribution" is defined as any payment for political
purposes for which full and adequate consideration is not
provided to the donor.
AB 1673
Page 2
When individuals or entities make payments in connection with
holding a fundraiser for a candidate, such payments ordinarily
are considered contributions to the candidate. However, current
law allows for some exceptions. For example, payments made by
the occupant of a home or office for costs related to any
meeting or fundraising event in the occupant's home or office
are not considered contributions under the PRA if the costs for
the meeting or fundraising event are $500 or less.
Although existing law prohibits lobbyists from making
contributions to elected state officers or candidates for
elected state office if that lobbyist is registered to lobby the
governmental agency for which the candidate is seeking election
or the governmental agency of the elected state officer, the
exception to the definition of the term "contribution" for the
purposes of hosted fundraising events does not exclude events
hosted by lobbyists. As a result, a lobbyist could hold a
fundraiser at his or her home and the cost would not be
considered a contribution, as long as the total cost of such an
event did not exceed $500. If other parties donate money or
goods in connection with the event, their payments must also be
counted to determine if $500 has been spent in connection with
the fundraiser. This includes goods or services provided by the
candidate or any other person attending the event. If the cost
of the event exceeds $500, all payments are counted as
contributions.
In February of this year, the FPPC approved a settlement in a
case in which a registered lobbyist hosted campaign fundraisers
for state elective officers and candidates at his house where he
provided items such as beverages, flower arrangements, and
cigars. The FPPC investigated and determined that the total
cost of the fundraisers hosted by the lobbyist at his home,
including the value the items provided by the lobbyist, exceeded
$500. As a result, the items provided by the lobbyist during
the fundraisers constituted non-monetary contributions to the
campaign committees of the elective officers and candidates who
benefitted from the fundraisers - all violations of the PRA. As
a result, the FPPC levied one of the largest penalties against a
lobbyist and issued warning letters to the elected officers and
candidates who benefitted from the fundraisers.
California voters passed an initiative, Proposition 9, in 1974
that created the FPPC and codified significant restrictions and
AB 1673
Page 3
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, such as those contained in
this bill, must further the purposes of the proposition and
require a two-thirds vote of each house of the Legislature.
Analysis Prepared by : Nichole Becker / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094
FN: 0003241