Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Spending On Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
FPPC rejects ALJ recommendation in Norco mailer case; commission will decide on record
Summary
After closed-session deliberations, the commission voted unanimously to reject the administrative law judge’s recommended dismissal in the Norco/Andy Okoro mass-mailing enforcement matter, saying the ALJ relied on factual findings not supported by the record and incorrect statements of law; the Commission will decide the case on the record under Gov. Code §11517(c)(2)(E).
The Fair Political Practices Commission on Aug. 21 rejected an administrative law judge’s recommended decision in the long-running enforcement matter involving the City of Norco and former City Manager Andy Okoro over a 2018 mass mailing about Measure R.
Background and enforcement position: The Enforcement Division opened the matter after an anonymous complaint alleging a city-paid four-page glossy mailer centered on a letter from City Manager Okoro urged residents to support Measure R, a local tax measure to preserve Norco’s equestrian infrastructure. Senior Commission Counsel Teresa Gilbertson argued the mailing went beyond neutral informational material, citing its timing, length, imagery and language — such as warnings that the city could “lose its identity and character as an equestrian lifestyle city” if the measure failed — and recommended the Commission reject the ALJ’s dismissal.
City response and ALJ ruling: The City of Norco, represented by counsel Colin Burns, said the materials were informational and part of an extensive public-finance outreach following identification of significant, ongoing budget gaps; Burns emphasized the local context, the city’s decades-long equestrian identity, and the ad hoc resident-driven infrastructure review that recommended the measure. The ALJ, after a multi-day hearing, had recommended dismissal, finding the mailer consistent with the city’s regular communications and therefore informational.
Commission action and rationale: After hearing enforcement, city counsel, and defense argument, the commission went into closed session to deliberate and then announced a unanimous vote to reject the ALJ’s recommended decision. Commissioners said the ALJ’s decision included factual findings not supported by the record and statements of law that were inaccurate or incorrectly applied. The Chair said the commission will decide the case on the evidentiary record pursuant to Government Code §11517(c)(2)(E).
Why it matters: The case tests the line between informational municipal communications and prohibited public expenditures for campaign advocacy (mass mailings). Counsel for the city and Okoro emphasized precedent (notably Vargas) that allows municipal explanation of local fiscal consequences and sometimes non-neutral presentations for ballot measures; enforcement argued the mailer’s style and timing cross the line into advocacy. The commission’s rejection of the ALJ report signals the agency will exercise its own de novo review in this case.
Next steps: The Commission will issue a written decision after completing its review of the administrative record. No financial penalty or sanction was announced at the meeting; the matter remains under Commission consideration.
