14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Examples of lower contribution limits include: • Federal $2,800 limit per individual donor per election for a federal candidate. • City of Dublin $500 limit per individual donor per election for a local candidate.5 The City of Dublin's $500 limit was adopted in 2009.6 No other Tri-Valley cities have a local contribution limit.' If the Council is interested in a contribution limit, it should provide staff with direction as to the amount of such a limit. Contributions to Self. Under AB 571, a candidate is not limited to the $4,900 cap that they may give to his/her own campaign. A candidate spending their own funds does not implicate concerns about corruption. And, the First Amendment protects a candidate's ability to self-fund for reasons of freedom of speech. It is not recommended that the Council consider restrictions on the amount that a candidate may give or loan to his/her own campaign, as such limits have not withstood legal challenge. Voluntary Expenditure Limit.8 Pleasanton has a voluntary limit for campaign expenditures. When adopted in 2008, the intent was to encourage candidates to engage with voters, and not rely on mass mailings or advertising. The voluntary expenditure limit was set at $1 per registered voter (more than the cost of a postcard mailer), plus an inflation adjustment. Candidates can voluntarily pledge to adhere to the expenditure limit, and there are no penalties for violations. The rationale for no penalties for violations, and the voluntary nature of the expenditure limit, is that courts have ruled that expenditures do not raise concerns such as corruption or undue influence (which issues are addressed by regulating contributions). Courts have decided that limiting expenditures is invalid under the First Amendment as it is a direct form of restraint on expression and association. Therefore, courts have not upheld local mandatory expenditure limits.9 ' See Dublin Municipal Code§2.28.030. 6 See Dublin Ord. 16-09 (2009). In 2009, Dublin's population was 44,731. Dublin's original limit of$100 was adopted in 1997, then increased to $300 in 1998. In 2017, the City of Livermore repealed its $250 limit on contributions to local candidates and campaign committees because it was "...too low in light of costs to mount an effective campaign in Livermore." See Livermore Ord. No. 2066. ' See Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 1.22. 9 The United States Supreme Court has ruled on three occasions that the government's interest in ridding the electoral process of corruption and the appearance of impropriety is insufficient to justify the restrictions on campaign-related expenditures. Moreover, the government has no legitimate ancillary interest in equalizing the amount of funds spent by the candidates and their committees. Page 3 of 4