CCMIN 03162021 - Laserfiche WebLink

advised a PAC can also spend independently of the candidate's campaign. She explained that if multiple members of the same family individually donated to the same candidate her only concern would be if underage children were shown as donors because a parent who already maxed out donations to that candidate is likely reimbursing the child. She clarified the rules are for individuals not households and it would be difficult to enforce the definition of a household. She further advised it would likely face a legal challenge if a husband and wife both wanted to associate with the same candidate with their personal incomes and were prohibited. In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Assistant City Attorney Seto advised she has been reviewing the FPPC fact sheets for insight on how to treat leftover funds received before January 1st and noted the clarification does not exist yet. She clarified FPPC is tracking the specific candidate and not the specific office meaning funds raised for a Council candidate can be later added to the same person's Mayoral bid. In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Assistant City Attorney Seto clarified individuals can spend up to $1,000 on their own to support or oppose a candidate without being subject to reporting requirements. She cited renting a banquet hall or a local newspaper advertisement as examples of things an individual can do that do not need to be reported if it is under $1,000 for an election cycle. She also confirmed the individual would not have to register as a PAC if they spent under $1,000. She advised the candidate would need to report fundraising totals, but the PAC would not unless it is over $2,000 for the PAC itself and not the specific candidate. Councilmember Arkin explained she is fine with keeping the pledge voluntary but expressed concerns about the message sent by not signing it. She echoed Councilmember Testa's comments about this dilemma before signing it with reluctance. She expressed concerns about the figure and the implications a potential candidate could perceive in thinking it would cost $55,000 to win. She noted this may eliminate a potential candidate who thinks they will need to use personal funds making it an equity issue. Councilmember Arkin wondered how a candidate could spend $55,000 without doing mass mailers and advertising. She reported she spent $6,200 on her campaign and won out of seven candidates. She noted she has been in the community and has been involved in it for a long time. She advised raising $6,200 was a challenge because many of her donations were very small and stated it would take a lot of donations to get to $50,000 from residents. She expressed her fears this could deter good people from running. She suggested lowering the sum and setting a different level for a City Council election and a more-costly Mayoral election. In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Councilmember Arkin suggested limits of $15,000 for City Council and $25,000 for Mayor. She expressed support for a contribution limit lower than the State's $4,900 threshold but expressed concerns about an enforcement model and costs associated with enforcement. Councilmember Balch remarked that running for Council is already daunting and this could disenfranchise potential candidates by having a different civic standard than the State's and understands the $1.00 per voter standard. He remarked that reaching people in person was not simple in this past year of pandemic and not every candidate challenge can be foreseen. He suggested these campaigns should be open and transparent. He called the expense limit a disclosure challenge and called for more accurate and timely disclosure filings. He advised several disclosures still have not been filed for the 2020 election. Councilmember Balch advised that no one has ever hit the limit. He suggested removing the inflationary adjustment but maintaining the $1.00 per voter limit. He explained that in a COVID-19 world it is hard to reach voters at $15.000. He explained Councilmember Arkin had many non-monetary things in her favor including the name-recognition of being previously elected. He further explained he City Council Minutes Page 12 of 15 March 16, 2021