My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN080294
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
CCMIN080294
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:30 AM
Creation date
5/21/1999 11:33:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Brandes also asked how informal committees (such as the "Dream Team") would <br />be affected by these regulations and how they would report contributions. <br /> <br /> Robert Wright, 2538 Corte Bella, suggested the need to disclose the services of <br />volunteers who do not live within the community. <br /> <br /> Sharrell Michelotti, 7873 Olive Court, pointed out the diffmulties of some candidates who <br />might be struggling financially and problems of being required to return much needed funds that <br />may be received within this time period. She also believed clarification was necessary for in- <br />kind contributions and the postmark issue. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver indicated the above points are well taken and clarifications are necessary. <br />He suggested the issue of outside volunteers being covered in the proposed regulations for <br />disclosure. In terms of the informal committees, Mr. Tarver believed the regulations covered <br />candidates and their committees, including "ad hoe" committees. <br /> <br /> Council discussed the definition of a "committee" and what triggers reporting <br />requirements. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr suggested a disclosure filing on Monday at noon before the election. She also <br />expressed her belief that the time limit on disclosures was to the advantage of the incumbent and <br />the detriment of a challenger. She preferred a simple typewritten statement to be turned in the <br />day before the election, which the press could review. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta indicated with that deadline, the information would not reach the papers <br />before most people had voted on election day. Mr. Roush then raised the issue of when would <br />the cut-off be for receipt of contributions. <br /> <br /> Council discussed the difficulties of receiving contributions sixty days after the election, <br />especially if a candidate is not successful. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico stated his belief that Council had done enough to strengthen disclosure by <br />adding the $25.00 threshold and additional filing period. Combined with the voluntary term <br />limit measure, adequate control is in effect. He believed the proposed regulation makes the <br />process overly complex and would discourage people from running for office. He suggested <br />waiting to see the effects of existing regulations. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Pico, seconded by Ms. Mohr, to take no action at this time. <br /> <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers - Mohr, Pico, Scribner, and Mayor Tarver <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: Councilmember Dennis <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />08/02/94 14 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.