At the state Fair Political Practices Commission, we are seeing a troubling increase in the number of cases of government officials spending public money to campaign for or against ballot measures without disclosing that spending to voters.

Richard C. Miadich is chairman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission. 

We’re asking the public to help us ferret out these cases by reporting instances of questionable political communications by public agencies.

The most common scenario is where a city, county or special district uses public monies to produce communications — letters, flyers or radio or television spots — intended to persuade voters to support or oppose ballot measures instead of simply providing voters with impartial information.

When government officials fail to disclose this type of spending before an election, they violate the state Political Reform Act by denying voters legally required information about who is trying to influence their votes.

The act was created over 45 years ago in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal to ensure the public receives timely and accurate information about political spending in our state and local elections.

Underlying the act is a simple, yet powerful, premise: The public should know the sources and amounts of money being raised and spent to influence their votes before deciding which candidates or measures to support. To ensure this promise is fulfilled, the voters established the Fair Political Practices Commission, an independent state agency, to enforce the act in a fair and nonpartisan fashion.

Twice in recent years the FPPC leveled significant penalties against public agencies for failing to disclose expenditures of public funds for campaign purposes. The Bay Area Rapid Transit District paid a $7,500 penalty in 2018 over Measure RR, a 2016 $3.5 billion bond measure.

Then, in August, the FPPC issued one of its biggest penalties ever, $1.35 million against Los Angeles County for its use of public funds in support of Measure H, a 2017 quarter-cent sales tax increase, and Measure W, a 2018 parcel tax. The investigation found that the county spending qualified it as a political committee in 2017 and that the county failed to comply with the act’s filing, disclosure and advertisement disclaimer requirements.

The need to robustly enforce the act’s disclosure requirements is especially important in these situations because it can help shine a light on illegal spending of public funds. Separate from the act, California law prohibits the expenditure of taxpayer dollars on election-related campaign activity.

This prohibition is vital to election integrity. As the California Supreme Court long ago observed, a “fundamental precept of this nation’s democratic electoral process … is that government may not ‘take sides’ in election contests.”

That is why the FPPC has made it a priority to identify instances in which the expenditure of public funds for election-related activity has not been properly disclosed.

We’ve expanded our “FPPC AdWatch” program to make it easier for the public to identify and report questionable communications by public agencies. If you saw such activity before Tuesday’s election, we encourage you to file a complaint. The statute of limitations allows us to investigate well into the next few years.

While we currently do not have the authority to stop illegal spending of public funds, our vigorous enforcement of the act’s disclosure requirements can assist state and local prosecutors, who do have the authority to stop such activity.

Sometimes, as former United States Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote many years ago, “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.”

Richard C. Miadich is chairman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission.