HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/06/1998, A1 - CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS ORDINANCE STUDY COMMITTEE AND UPDATE ON CHANGES IN STATE CAMPAIGN REGULATIONSFROM:
council
accnaa
12cpoRt
C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O
Bonnie Gawf, City Cler �91
M .bm Due
I® N
SUBJECT: CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS ORDINANCE STUDY COMMITTEE AND
UPDATE ON CHANGES IN STATE CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS
RECOMMENDATION
1) By motion, appoint Terry Conner, Robert Griffin, Wilda Rosene, Bob Silva and Pat Veesart
to the Election Campaign Ordinance Study Committee, effective immediately, to sunset upon
adoption of a new Election Campaign Ordinance; and 2) Receive and file status report on
Proposition 208 update.
DISCUSSION
Election Campaign Regulation Committee
Chapter 2.40 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code sets forth local campaign regulations for
municipal elections. The ordinance was last updated in 1994 and sunsets on June 30, 1998,
unless it is readopted prior to that date. The process to amend or readopt the ordinance begins
with Council appointment of a committee of at least five citizens to study the efficacy of this
Chapter of our Municipal Code.
The nominees have been contacted and they agree to serve on this Committee. The City Attorney
and City Clerk will act as staff.
Update on Status of Recent changes to State Campaign Regulations (Proposition 208)
In November, 1996, voters passed Proposition 208, an initiative which introduced sweeping
changes to State Campaign Financing Regulations. Subsequent to the passage of Prop 208, the
Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) codified those provisions into the Political Reform
Act, and elections are now subject to those regulations. Some of the regulations are similar to
our local ordinance, some are more stringent, and a few directly conflict with language in the
Municipal Code. Following is a summary list of some basic provisions included in Prop 208.
Council Agenda Report – Campaign Regulations Ordinance
Paget
Contribution Limits
• Maximum contribution of $100 per candidate per election (in jurisdictions under
100,000 in population)
• Contribution limit for `Small Contributor Committees' is twice the individual limit **
• Prohibits contributions, solicitations, or acceptance of contributions for a candidate by
appointees /commissioners for an individual who appointed them*
• Prohibits registered lobbyists from making contributions to candidates in
governmental agencies or bodies that they are authorized to lobby*
• Prohibits individual individual contributions greater than $500 year to a PAC*
• Candidate cannot raise money more than six months before or 90 days after an
election*
• Bans transfers of funds from one candidate to another*
• A loan becomes a contribution after 30 days (same $ limitation on loans as
contributions)*
• Surplus funds can either be refunded pro -rata to contributors or donated to the
"general fund" (Prop 208 doesn't say which general fund — initially the FPPC said it
is the State general fund, but now they are backing off, saying that it is the general
fund of the candidates' jurisdiction. We're expecting a formal written clarification of
that issue soon)*
• Elected officials can deposit up to $10,000 into a segregated officeholder's fund for
expenses incurred to carry out official duties related to holding office*
• Spouses and other family members are bound by these restrictions*
• Contributions that do not fall under these restrictions
• Candidate's personal funds
• Independent expenditures by third parties
• Ballot measure contributions
• Volunteer personal services
• Voluntary Expenditure Limits*
• Jurisdiction may adopt or not
• Local ceiling :< $1 per resident (- $42,000 for SLO)
• Incentives are higher contribution limits: $250 in jurisdictions < 100,000
• Additional filing requirements
* Indicates that the new provision is not addressed by M.C. Chapter 2.40
** Indicates that the new state law conflicts with M.C. Chapter 2.40
Further complicating this issue, the constitutionality of Proposition 208 is being challenged at the
trial court level, and oral arguments were presented to Judge Lawrence Karlton and ended on
November 5, 1997. The judge has stated that the issues are quite complex and while he has
concerns about the effects of contribution and spending limits on candidates' ability to
communicate with their voters, he is equally concerned with the risk of subverting the will of the
voters who supported the initiative. Judge Karlton has indicated that he does not know when he
will make a ruling on Proposition 208, but that it could be months before he renders a decision.
9/- z
Council Agenda Report - Campaign Regulations Ordinance
Page 3
Meanwhile until a ruling is made, Proposition 208 applies to every campaign for state and local
office in California. In areas that our ordinance differs from the State law, the "more stringent"
law will take precedence.
Because of the complexity of the issues surrounding Proposition 208 and its subsequent legal
challenge, Council may wish to appoint the committee and direct the members to study the
ordinance in relationship to the provisions outlined in Proposition 208. The committee can then
present its findings to Council; however, it may be wise at that time to direct the committee to
delay making final recommendations to Council either until Judge Karlton has ruled on the
constitutionality of Proposition 208 or until the first meeting in May, which ever is earlier. In
order to prevent the current local campaign ordinance from sunsetting on June 30, 1998,
Council must hold the first reading to readopt or amend it by May 6, 1998.
CONCURRENCES
The City Attomey has reviewed the City's Campaign Finance Ordinance in conjunction with
provisions of Proposition 208 and concurs with the recommendation.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact to the City in appointing the committee.
ALTERNATIVES
Take no action, which would allow our local campaign ordinance to sunset as of June 30, 1998,
and campaign financing would be governed solely by State law. This option is not
recommended, as the fate of Proposition 208 is still unknown, thus the current State campaign
financing laws may change dramatically with the judicial ruling. Even if all provisions of
Proposition 208 are upheld, some issues included in our local ordinance, such as the detailed
publication of contributions, would not be addressed by the state law.
Ai -3