n this Jan. 17, 2013 file photo, a Lyft car drives crosses Market Street in San Francisco. The ride-hailing firm Lyft&nbsp;Inc., which has enjoyed a string of legislative victories at the Capitol, has agreed to pay $6,000 in fines for repeatedly being late in disclosing its use of lobbyists to influence California state officials.An investigation by the enforcement staff of the state Fair Political Practices Commission alleged that Lyft failed to file in a timely manner five lobbyist employer reports. The firm admitted the allegations and reached an agreement with staff to pay $6,000 in administrative penalties to the state.The commission will meet July 21 to act on the proposed agreement on fines.Lyft spokeswoman Alexandra LaManna said in a statement: &ldquo;Lyft takes its reporting obligations seriously and has fully cooperated with the F.P.P.C. We look forward to resolving this matter."Companies that hire lobbyists to advocate with state government are required to file timely reports detailing the amount of payments. Lyft failed to file the reports by the deadline.&ldquo;An express purpose of the [Political Reform]&nbsp;Act is to ensure that the activities and finances of lobbyists are disclosed so that improper influences are not directed at public officials,&rdquo; according to the staff report.During the 2013&ndash;14 legislative session, Lyft spent more than $271,000 on lobbying activity related to four transportation-regulating bills. One was filed 530 days late, although Lyft did not conduct any lobbying activity during the quarter.&ldquo;According to Lyft, the late filing was an oversight caused by Lyft&rsquo;s reliance on its lobbying firms to file its reports and its lack of experience as a lobbyist employer,&rdquo; the staff report said.Other reports, during which there was lobbying activity, were filed from 11 to 165 days late.In one case, a report failed to disclose payment for text messages, emails&nbsp;and other communications sent to&nbsp;Lyft customers and drivers encouraging recipients to contact their state legislators.&ldquo;According to Lyft, the communications were part of Lyft&rsquo;s overall marketing program, most of which is not related to influencing legislative action, and that is why it initially failed to identify the communications as items that needed to be reported on lobbyist employer reports,&rdquo; the FPPC report said. &ldquo;Upon realizing the mistake, Lyft voluntarily and proactively reported the violations&hellip;&rdquo;Lyft officials told investigators that the violations were &ldquo;inadvertent,&rdquo; and said the&nbsp;investigation &ldquo;revealed no evidence that Lyft intended to conceal its activity or mislead the public, and Lyft does not have a prior history of violations of the Act,&rdquo; the staff report said in recommending less-than-maximum fines.