At the Beverly Hills City Council Study Session on July 1, the Beverly Hills Legislative/Lobby Committee sought direction on two recent state and federal bills and approval of its recommended positions on 10 state and federal bills.
Senior Management Analyst Mandy Jiang presented SB 630 and H.R. 1048 to the council to seek a recommended position.
State Senate Bill 630, introduced by State Senator Ben Allen, originally increased the annual tax credit cap, seeking to modernize California industries’ tax and credit program, such as for film and television, to ensure that the state’s programs are competitive. The Legislative/Lobby Committee unanimously recommended supporting the bill in its original form, which was identical to another bill in the State Assembly (AB 1138). However, the bill has since been “gutted and amended”—a legislative tactic that entirely removes the bill’s original content and replaces it with different provisions. Now, the bill addresses oversight of state agencies regarding land management for the state park system.
Legislative liaison lobby members Vice Mayor John Mirisch and Councilmember Craig Corman both oppose SB 630 on the basis of “gut-and-amend” entirely. Mirisch called the legislative tactic “abhorrent,” “not transparent” and “an awful way to do business,” and accepts “gut-and-amend” only in extraordinary circumstances. Councilmember Corman agreed with the vice mayor’s stance on “gut-and-amend” and added that the revised bill appears to address an issue that is “not of much concern” to the city, shifting approval of certain leases from the Department of General Services instead to the Department of Parks and Recreation.
Councilmember Mary Wells agreed with the lobby members’ feelings about “gut-and-amend,” but thinks SB 630 still has merit, and shouldn’t be rejected solely because of the opposed legislative tactic. Both Mayor Sharona Nazarian and Councilmember Lester Friedman took a neutral stance, agreeing that “gut-and-amend” is not a transparent way of legislating, and would’ve appreciated more information as to why the bill took this route.
The other legislation needing council direction was H.R. 1048—a federal bill titled the “DETERRENT Act,” which stands for Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions. The bill would require U.S. colleges and universities to report to the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) any gift or dollar amount from a foreign country or entity of concern and from any foreign source not of concern valued at $50,000 or more. It would also require American colleges and universities to request waiver sign-offs for any contracts engaged with a foreign country or entity of concern and to report this to the DOE annually.
H.R. 1048, proposed by Representative Michelle Steel, recognizes foreign influence as a serious threat to national security, research, and students and sees this bill bringing transparency to foreign gift reporting for American colleges and universities.
Mirisch and Corman differed slightly on their stances on H.R. 1048. The vice mayor believes that this “level of scrutiny” is warranted, and that higher education institutions should be transparent and disclose all dealings with foreign entities.
However, though Corman agreed with the vice mayor on that premise, he stated that the DOE’s veto power over university and college contracts “strikes [him] as a form of censorship” and could create “political headwinds” to necessary research agreements. Additionally, he believes that if national security is the main concern of this bill, he’s not sure why the DOE should be making that call. The rest of the council, including Mayor Sharon Nazarian, align more closely with Corman’s stance and would support H.R. 1048 if amended.
The council approved the committee’s recommended positions on the other 10 bills, which Mirisch and Corman stated align with the city’s platform.
