BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS
AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Alex Padilla, Chair
BILL NO: AB 1728 HEARING DATE: 6/24/14
AUTHOR: GARCIA ANALYSIS BY: Darren Chesin
AMENDED: 4/8/14
FISCAL: YES
SUBJECT
Political Reform Act: local water boards
DESCRIPTION
Existing law , pursuant to the Levine Act of 1982, a portion of
the Political Reform Act (PRA), provides for all of the
following:
Prohibits any officer of an agency, as defined, from
accepting, soliciting or directing a contribution of more than
$250 from a party or participant with a matter pending before
the agency involving a license, permit, or other entitlement
for use during the time the matter is pending before the
agency and for three months following the date a final
decision is rendered in the matter.
Requires any officer of an agency, as defined, who received a
contribution of more than $250 from a party or participant
with a matter pending before the agency involving a license,
permit, or other entitlement for use in the 12 months before
the proceeding, to disclose the contribution on the record of
the proceeding.
Prohibits any officer of an agency, as defined, who received a
contribution of more than $250 from a party or participant
with a matter pending before the agency involving a license,
permit, or other entitlement for use in the 12 months before
the proceeding from making, participating in making, or
attempting to influence the decision in the proceeding.
Allows an officer to participate in the proceeding if the
officer returns the contribution within 30 days of knowing, or
the time the officer should have known, of the contribution
and the proceeding.
Defines "license, permit, or other entitlement for use" as all
business, professional, trade and land use licenses and
permits and all other entitlements for use, including all
entitlements for land use, all contracts (other than
competitively bid, labor, or personal employment contracts),
and all franchises.
This bill makes all officials who are elected to local water
boards formed pursuant to the Water Code subject to the Levine
Act's existing provisions limiting contributions to officials
from entities with business before the agency involving a
license, permit, or other entitlement for use, as discussed
above but instead provides that the term "license, permit, or
other entitlement for use" includes all contracts except those
that are competitively bid (thereby including labor and personal
employment contracts).
BACKGROUND
The Levine Act of 1982 : The Levine Act, named after its author
Assemblymember Mel Levine, restricts campaign contributions made
to officers of most state and local agencies by parties to a
proceeding pending before those agencies. Enacted in 1982, the
Levine Act was a response to reports that members of a state
agency sought to raise money from individuals and entities that
had permit requests pending before the agency. The Levine Act
is unique among the provisions of the PRA in that it is the only
area in which a campaign contribution can be the basis for a
disqualifying conflict of interest. The PRA otherwise does not
treat campaign contributions as a potential basis for conflicts
of interest.
The Levine Act is narrowly drafted to apply only to decisions
made by agencies with membership that is not directly elected by
voters, and only to proceedings involving licenses, permits, or
other entitlements for use. Proceedings of a more general
nature and with broader applicability are not covered by the
Levine Act.
The Levine Act generally does not apply to the judicial branch,
local governmental bodies whose members are elected directly by
the voters, members of the Legislature and the Board of
Equalization, or constitutional officers. However, when an
officer who is otherwise exempted serves as a voting member of
AB 1728 (GARCIA)
Page 2
an agency that is subject to the Levine Act, then the
contribution restrictions of the Levine Act do apply to that
officer. For example, someone elected to a county board of
supervisors is not subject to the Levine Act simply for sitting
on the board of supervisors; but, if that official also sits on
a regional transit agency, which is subject to the Levine Act,
then the officer would be required to comply with the
contribution restrictions that apply to all other members of the
regional transit agency.
Because the Levine Act does not apply to local governmental
bodies whose members are elected directly by the voters, it
applies to some special districts, but not others.
Water Districts : According to information from the 2010 report,
"What's So Special About Special Districts? (Fourth Edition),"
prepared by the Senate Committee on Local Government, there are
more than 700 different water districts of various types in
California. In most cases, the governing boards of these water
districts are elected, and as a result are not subject to the
provisions of the Levine Act. There are at least some water
districts, however, that are governed by appointed boards of
directors, or by boards of directors that are a combination of
elected and appointed members. Those districts are subject to
the Levine Act under existing law.
This bill makes all districts that are formed pursuant to the
Water Code subject to the Levine Act, regardless of whether the
district is governed by an elected board or an appointed board.
COMMENTS
1.According to the Author : AB 1728 requires members of local
water boards excuse themselves from decisions when
contributors are involved. AB 1728 includes officials of
local government agencies formed pursuant to the provisions of
the Water Code and applies to proceedings to award licenses or
permits for use.
Appointed members of boards or commissions, who are running as
candidates for elective office, are restricted from making
AB 1728 (GARCIA)
Page 3
decisions that affect contributors or potential contributors
who appear before them in a proceeding involving a license,
permit or entitlement for use (Govt Code Section 84308 ).
Members of the State Board of Equalization also have to abide
by the same prohibition. Unfortunately, there are still
government entities where there is no requirement to recuse
one's self from voting on issues that may pose a conflict of
interest.
2.Goose v. Gander . This bill would expand the scope of the
Levine Act from appointed state and local officials to
including all officials who are elected to local water boards
formed pursuant to the Water Code. Under this bill all other
state and local elected officials would remain exempt from the
Levine Act. Is this equitable?
3.Previous Legislation : AB 1241 (Norby) of 2011 would have
exempted officials who are directly elected to an agency from
the Levine Act for agencies that are governed by a board that
contains both elected and appointed members. AB 1241 was
approved by the Assembly on a 65-6 vote, but failed passage on
the Senate Floor on a 19-20 vote.
AB 2164 (Norby) of 2010 was substantially similar to AB 1241.
AB 2164 was approved by the Assembly on a 60-2 vote, but was
held in this committee.
PRIOR ACTION
Assembly Elections and Redistricting Committee: 5-0
Assembly Local Government Committee: 8-1
Assembly Appropriations Committee: 12-4
Assembly Floor: 56-16
POSITIONS
Sponsor: Author
Support: None received
Oppose: Association of California Water Agencies
California Special Districts Association
AB 1728 (GARCIA)
Page 4
AB 1728 (GARCIA)
Page 5