BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �





                                                                  AB 2692

                                                                  Page  1


          GOVERNOR'S VETO
          AB 2692 (Fong)
          As Introduced  February 21, 2014
          2/3 vote

           ELECTIONS           6-0         APPROPRIATIONS      17-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Fong, Donnelly, Bonta,    |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow,           |
          |     |Hall, Perea, Rodriguez    |     |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian  |
          |     |                          |     |Calderon, Campos,         |
          |     |                          |     |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez,  |
          |     |                          |     |Holden, Jones, Linder,    |
          |     |                          |     |Pan, Quirk,               |
          |     |                          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner,    |
          |     |                          |     |Weber                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |76-0 |(May 19, 2014)  |SENATE: |34-0 |(August 14,    |
          |           |     |                |        |     |2014)          |
          |           |     |                |        |     |               |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
          SUMMARY  :  Requires a person who improperly benefits from the  
          personal use of campaign funds to forfeit the value of the  
          personal benefit received, as specified.  Specifically,  this  
          bill  :  

          1)Provides that if the Fair Political Practices Commission  
            (FPPC) determines in an administrative action that an  
            expenditure was made that confers a substantial personal  
            benefit to a person who had the authority to approve that  
            expenditure, but the expenditure is not directly related to a  
            political, legislative, or governmental purpose, that the  
            individual who received the substantial personal benefit shall  
            pay to the General Fund (GF) of the state an amount equal to  
            the substantial personal benefit that he or she received.

          2)Provides that a payment to the GF of the value of the benefit  










                                                                  AB 2692

                                                                  Page  2


            received, as required by this bill, shall be in addition to  
            any penalty imposed by the FPPC.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, "California law recognizes  
          that ethical concerns may arise when a candidate personally  
          benefits financially from contributions received by his or her  
          campaign.  For that reason, the Political Reform Act (PRA)  
          prohibits campaign funds from being used to compensate a  
          candidate or elected officer for the performance of political,  
          legislative, or governmental activities, except for  
          reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses incurred for political,  
          legislative, or governmental purposes.  Additionally, state law  
          prohibits candidates and committee officers from using campaign  
          funds for personal expenses.

          "Individuals who violate the 'personal use' provisions of  
          California law are subject to civil or administrative fines, but  
          existing law does not require a person to forfeit the personal  
          benefit that he or she received from the illegal expenditure of  
          campaign funds.  The purpose of California's 'personal use'  
          restrictions on campaign funds is to ensure that funds solicited  
          for campaign purposes are used for those purposes, and are not  
          used to personally enrich candidates, officeholders, and  
          political committee officers.  To further that purpose, and to  
          provide a greater disincentive against the improper use of  
          campaign funds, AB 2692 requires individuals who violate the  
          'personal use' laws to forfeit the improper benefits that they  
          received, in addition to any fines they face for violating state  
          law."

          Existing law generally prohibits campaign funds from being used  
          for personal expenses, and instead requires campaign  
          expenditures to be reasonably related to a political,  
          legislative, or governmental purpose.  When a campaign  
          expenditure results in a personal benefit of more than $200 to  
          an individual who had the authority to approve the expenditure,  
          the expenditure must be directly related to a political,  
          legislative, or governmental purpose.  These provisions are  










                                                                  AB 2692

                                                                  Page  3


          intended to ensure that campaign funds are not used as a method  
          of personally enriching candidates and officers of political  
          committees.

          As is the case with other suspected violations of the PRA, the  
          FPPC may bring an administrative enforcement action if it  
          believes that an individual or a committee has improperly used  
          campaign funds for personal purposes.  When the FPPC determines  
          that a violation has occurred, it can impose a monetary penalty  
          of up to $5,000 per violation.  Because the maximum monetary  
          penalty available in an administrative enforcement action is not  
          dependent on the value of the personal benefit received, it is  
          possible that a person could receive an improper personal  
          benefit from campaign spending that exceeds the maximum penalty  
          that the FPPC can impose through the administrative process.   
          The FPPC does have the ability to bring a civil lawsuit for a  
          violation of the personal use provisions of law, in which case  
          the maximum monetary penalty available is three times the amount  
          of the unlawful expenditure.  Such civil lawsuits, however, are  
          uncommon, and the FPPC deals with a substantial majority of  
          enforcement cases through its administrative enforcement  
          process.  By requiring a person to forfeit the value of an  
          improper personal benefit that he or she received, this bill  
          will ensure that a person who uses campaign funds for personal  
          purposes does not receive a benefit in excess of the maximum  
          possible administrative fine.

          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, such as those contained in  
          this bill, must further the purposes of the initiative and  
          require a two-thirds vote of both houses of the Legislature.  
           
           GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE  :

          "This bill would require a person who improperly benefits from  
          the personal use of campaign funds to pay to the General Fund an  
          amount equal to the personal benefit received in addition to any  
          penalty imposed by the Fair Political Practices Commission.










                                                                  AB 2692

                                                                  Page  4



          "Current law provides for substantial penalties against this  
          type of behavior.  Each violation can result in a fine of  
          $5,000.  I believe these fines are a sufficient deterrent."


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094 


                                                                FN: 0005646