• HOME
  • SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
  • PROFILE
  • ALLEN MATKINS
  • CONTACT
Print Email Shortlink

The California Constitution, The FACA And The SEC’s New Investor Advisory Committee

By Keith Paul Bishop on May 11, 2012 in Administrative Procedure, CalPERS/CalSTRS

Last month the Securities and Exchange Commission announced the formation of a new Investor Advisory Committee.  Section 911 of the Dodd-Frank Act created the committee to advise the SEC on:

  • regulatory priorities,
  • regulation of securities products,
  • trading strategies,
  • fee structures,
  • the effectiveness of disclosure, and
  • on initiatives to protect investor interests and to promote investor confidence and the integrity of the securities marketplace.

The new committee is comprised of 21 members.  California’s two big retirements systems, the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and the California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS), each have representatives on the committee.  Section 911 of the Dodd-Frank Act provides committee members are entitled to compensation.

This raises the question of whether these appointments of California state officials violate Article VII, Section 7 of the California Constitution which provides that with certain exceptions ”A person holding a lucrative office under the United States or other power may not hold a civil office of profit.”  The purpose of the provision is to prevent “dual office-holding by one person under two separate and distinct governments, and the separation of the allegiance justly due one by its officers from that due to another power.” McCoy v. Board of Supervisors, 18 Cal.2d 193, 196 (1941).

Interestingly, Congress expressly exempted the committee from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. app.  You may not be familiar with the FACA, but it was the law at issue when former President Clinton established the President’s Task Force on National Health Care Reform and named his wife as its chairman.  Ass’n of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. v. Hillary Rodham Clinton, 997 F.2d 898 (D.C. Cir. 1993).  It was also the law at issue a few years later when Public Citizen challenged presidential consideration of evaluations by the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary of potential judicial nominees.  Public Citizen v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 491 U.S. 440 (1989).

President Nixon signed the FACA into law in 1972 to create a structured process for the creation, operation and termination of advisory committees.  For example, the FACA requires that advisory committees:

  • File a charter with the Administrator of the General Services Agency containing specified provisions (§ 9);
  • Make their meetings open to the public (§ 10(a)(1));
  • Give interested persons the opportunity to attend, appear before, or file statements with the committee (§ 10(a)(3));
  • Keep and publish minutes of each meeting (§ 10(c)); and
  • Allow public inspection of their records (§ 10).

I also wasn’t able to find the committee in the FACA database supported by the General Services Administration’s Committee Management Secretariat even though other SEC committees are included.  The FACA database provides a wealth of information about federal advisory committees, including information about meetings, reports, members, and costs.

Article VIICalifornia ConstitutionCalPERSCalSTRSFACAfaca databaseFederal Advisory Committee Actlucrative officePublic Citizen v. U.S. Dept. of JusticeSECSection 7Section 911
  • Related Stories
  • Most Popular
  • If You’re Relying On The Signature Of Two Officers, You May Want To Think Again
  • Court Explicates Scope of Usury Exemption For Real Estate Brokers
  • Supreme Court To Decide If It Will Decide Whether Section 16 Plaintiff Has Constitutional Standing
  • But Wait, California May Require Even More In Annual Reports To Shareholders
  • California Requires Many Foreign Corporations To Send Annual Financial Statements To Shareholders
  • The Salon Sub Rosa And Nevada Corporate Law
  • Conflict Minerals Bill In Suspense File (For Now)
  • Concurrent Jurisdiction Found For Covered Class Actions
  • Nevada Supreme Court Adopts Delaware Approach To Fair Value Burden Of Proof
  • SEC Proposes John Wilkes Booth Rules
  • If I Were A Carpenter, I’d Build A Better Proxy
  • CalPERS’ Annus Horribilis: How Much Worse Will It Get?
← Previous Next →

AUTHOR

Keith Paul Bishop
Partner
(949) 553-1313
kbishop@allenmatkins.com
CONTACT ME

RECOGNITION

NEWSLETTER

TOPICS

  • Accountants
  • Administrative Procedure
  • Attorney-Client Privilege/Work Product
  • Broker-Dealers
  • California Securities Laws
  • California Sui Generis
  • CalPERS/CalSTRS
  • Choice of Law/Conflict of Law
  • Corporate Governance
  • Department of Corporations
  • Derivative Suits
  • Enforcement & Investigations
  • Fairness Hearings
  • Finance Lenders
  • Financial Institutions
  • Investment Advisers
  • JOBS Act
  • Legislation
  • Limited Liability Companies
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Nevada Corporations
  • Non-Compete Agreements
  • Partnerships
  • Professional Responsibility
  • Pseudo-Foreign Corporations
  • Public Records Act/FOIA
  • Secretary of State
  • Securities Litigation
  • Uncategorized
  • Video

YOUTUBE

TWITTER

FACEBOOK

CALENDAR

May 2012
M T W T F S S
« Apr   Jun »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Copyright © 2013 California Corporate & Securities Law.

Powered by WordPress and News.

  • follow:follow:
  • Become my Facebook friend Become my Facebook friend
  • Connect with me Connect with me
  • RSS RSS
  • Tweet with me Tweet with me