AQMD mulls measure to require talks disclosure: contacts with board members would have to be reported.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District, responding to pressure exerted by a local state senator, has drafted a law that would force industry lobbyists and other special interest representatives to publicly disclose communications with AQMD board members when district business is discussed privately.

Under proposed Rule 111, lobbyists or others other who hold private meetings with any of the AQMD's 12 board members would have to file a written summary of their contact within five days of the communication, detailing issues discussed, positions conveyed and the interests represented. If a board member received written information from a lobbyist or advocate not distributed to other directors, it would be up to the board member to file the report. Once the reports are filed with the AQMD clerk, they would become public record.

Scheduled for board debate May 1, the proposed law was triggered by criticism of closed-door meetings between AQMD officials and business lobbyists by state Sen. Herschel Rosenthal, D-Los Angeles.

Last year, in an effort to appease Rosenthal, AQMD staff proposed requiring directors to outline their private -- or ex parte -- communications at the beginning of public hearings. The California Air Resources Board, which regulates state gasoline and tailpipe standards, has enacted a similar policy.

Rosenthal, however, argued that wasn't good enough because of time lags between private contacts and public meetings, and has co-authored a proposed state law that mirrors exactly what the district will consider. A Rosenthal aide said the lawmaker would aggressively push his bill, SB 1328, if the AQMD board does not enact its own rule.

If approved, the district law would be the first to cover special interest advocates working the AQMD, which regulates the air-pollution activities of 30,000 Southern California businesses and entities. Officials did not know how many legislative advocates regularly lobby board members.

Ironically, the lobbyist-reform move comes at the same time a state-ordered audit concluded AQMD has made "significant strides" in cutting red tape and improving communications with business, which has long criticized anti-smog officials for being callous to its input.

Nonetheless, the need for regulations governing contacts between lobbyists and board members became clear, environmental groups contend, after Southern California Edison representatives convinced AQMD in private meetings last year to give the utility more time to comply with tough new limits on power-plant emissions.

"We're supportive of the disclosure rule because it tends to equalize the playing field between those interest groups that have very substantial resources and those that don't," said Jan Chatten-Brown, a special assistant in the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office and a board member of the Coalition for Clean Air, a Westside environmental group. "It's very important to minimize any skewing of rule-making when industry lobbies a board member and the information used is not subject to public review."

Edison officials did not return Business Journal phone calls.

What makes Rule 111 particularly vital now, Chatten-Brown added, is that AQMD is seeking advice from a wide range of sources on a complex plan to replace some clean-air laws with a first-ever "smog exchange" system in which companies could buy and sell pollution credits.

But Rob Wyman, an attorney with Los Angeles-based Latham & Watkins who represents some of the Southland's biggest industrial polluters like Northrop and Shell corporations before AQMD, predicted Rule 111 could have a sweeping and negative effect.

"Anything like this is going to have a chilling impact on the environmental community as much as corporations," said Wyman. "People shouldn't be hiding issues from the public, but it's a bad thing to discourage communications, especially for small businesses."

Exemptions to the rule would be granted to representatives of companies with fewer than 10 employees or gross revenues less than $500,000 annually, as well as citizens representing themselves. Board members or lobbyists found guilty of intentional civil violations could be slapped with a maximum fine of $1,000. Top penalties for criminal misdemeanors are six months in jail or a $1,000 fine.