The Fair Political Practices Commission on March 20 adopted a set of regulatory changes that amend and repeal provisions implementing Government Code section 84308, commonly called the Levine Act. The package clarifies when the statute applies, updates contribution thresholds to match recent legislation and removes a staff-drafted definition of "competitively bid" contracts from the commissionregulations.

Commission counsel Torren Lewis and senior commission counsel Kevin Cornwall told commissioners the changes respond to statutory amendments enacted in 2023 and 2024 that raised the contribution threshold and added new exemptions such as contracts under $50,000. Lewis said the revisions make the statuteapplication prospective and tie the relevant timeline to when the governmental decision or conduct occurred rather than only when a proceeding began.

The package wipes Regulation 18438.3, which defined "agent," because that term is now defined in subdivision (h) of section 84308; removes regulatory language that aggregated contributions by agents with those of parties and participants; and revises disclosure rules so a party must disclose contributions before an agency renders any decision. The rules also update internal streamline thresholds and other cross-references to reflect the statutory increase from $250 to $500.

The most contested topic during the discussion was the regulation the commission had previously used to define "competitively bid contract." Commissioners heard that earlier regulatory language required awarding to the "lowest responsible bidder" and did not account for transactions where jurisdictions award to the highest bidder (for example, the sale of land). Lewis explained the statutory language adopted by the Legislature now refers broadly to awards made "pursuant to a competitive process," and he advised the commission that the broader statutory wording constrains the agency from imposing a narrower regulatory definition that would require awards to the lowest or highest bidder.

Representatives of Common Cause urged the commission to keep a regulatory definition or minimum standard so jurisdictions could not adopt processes that are "competitive in name only." Sean McMorris of California Common Cause said, "I think that the definition is still important," arguing a baseline (for instance, explicitly covering highest or lowest bidders) would reduce the opportunity for circumvention. Commissioners and staff replied that, under the statute as amended, many fact-specific inquiries about a jurisdiction's process would need to be resolved on a case-by-case basis and that agencies with discretionary, catch-all provisions likely would not meet the statutory exemption.

Commissioners directed staff to remove the narrow definition from the current rules and to solicit additional examples and engagement from the regulated community and stakeholders before proposing any replacement regulatory definition. Chair Silver and several commissioners said they favored outreach to cities, counties and advocacy groups (including Cal Cities and Los Angeles County) to gather real-world examples of competitive processes that might merit a clarified rule.

The commission voted unanimously to adopt the repeal and amendments. Chair Silver moved adoption; Commissioner Ortiz seconded. Commissioner Brandt, Commissioner Ortiz, Commissioner Wilson and Chair Silver voted in favor.

The commission also noted related housekeeping revisions across regulations that implement conflict-of-interest, disclosure and streamline procedures so the code and regulations are consistent with recent legislative changes.