CCMIN121807 - Laserfiche WebLink

Staff also assembled information regarding amounts raised for elections which has continued to grow. Contributions by individuals remain the largest source, but recently there has been an increase in PAC's and other committees and groups. Regarding voluntary expenditure limits, these implicate the issues of freedom of speech and freedom of association and because of this, these limits can be voluntary only for Pleasanton as a General Law city. San Ramon has a volunteer expenditure limit and recalculate every election what they estimate the cost of two mailings would be. Other cities such as Hayward have a voluntary expenditure limit of $50,000; Newark is $1 per resident or $43,000; and Oakland's expenditure limit varies. They are a Charter City with 400,000 voters, for Mayoral candidates it is $.70 per resident or $300,000, and for Councilmembers it is $1.50 per resident within that Councilmember's district. Ms. Seto said if the Council is interested in pursuing a voluntary expenditure limit, staff would recommend setting it on the amount of registered voters in the City. If the amount was set at $1 per registered voter, the limit would be slightly more than $36,000. Staff would require discretion on: 1) how to calculate the limit such as $1 per registered voter; 2) when a candidate must make a pledge to adopt the voluntary expenditure limit. Staff recommends this be done within 5 days of filing the nomination papers; 3) what period should expenditures be counted. Staff recommends this be the 113 days prior to an election because this is when a candidate can first file their nomination papers; and 4) whether there should be penalties for any types of violation. Staff recommends no penalties, as public scrutiny would be sufficient. San Rafael is a city who once had in place a penalty for violating pledges and the fine was $20,000. Councilmember McGovern requested that contributions collected for those committees established outside an election date be made public. Councilmember Sullivan asked if the pledge would apply for someone who has a committee and raised or spent funds prior to the 113 days. Assistant City Attorney Seto said the Council could choose to extend the timeframe back to capture the entire time which would capture all funds or make the period shorter. Councilmember Thorne confirmed that the Council has the traditional guideline of requiring 3 reporting periods, as well as a fourth reporting period 4 days prior to the election. He supported real-time campaign reporting when it becomes available; however until that time, he felt additional reporting periods would be burdensome on treasurers. Regarding local contribution limits, Assistant City Attorney Seto said Dublin has a contribution limit of $300; Livermore of $250 and other Alameda cities have larger amounts. Danville does not have any limit. Staff recommends a limit of $250 because there was a strong interest to retain the $25 contribution reporting threshold. She said staff would need policy direction regarding what election period the limit would apply to, every option can be modified to address various interests, and one option could be to start a month after the last election but end contribution acceptance 7 days before the election starts, and all contribution would be reported on the final campaign statement filed 4 days prior to the election. Another option could be to shorten the period in which contributions are received, such as 12 months prior to the election taking place, but it could include the election date. Another option could be to have contributions continue to be received after the election date, which helps to retire campaign debt. City Council Minutes 4 December 18, 2007