My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN121807
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
CCMIN121807
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2008 4:21:47 PM
Creation date
1/16/2008 4:10:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
12/18/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN121807
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Councilmember Thorne said he was having difficulty with contribution limits for candidates and <br />expenditure limits, felt incumbents have an advantage but typically do not run unopposed in <br />Pleasanton. He supported free speech protections under the First Amendment and said he <br />would rather see more materials come in with the candidate's opinion rather than what someone <br />else is saying about them. He said the counter-reforms under review will encourage people to <br />finance their own campaigns, he did not want the dais to become a playground for the wealthy <br />and said limits on expenditures and campaigns may create a negative effect. <br />Councilmember McGovern confirmed with the City Clerk that the date of the last filing deadline <br />is 4 days prior to the election, with the cut-off being 7 days in order for the treasurer to work on <br />the filing. <br />Councilmember McGovern felt a Code of Ethics which would attach itself to the Commissioners <br />Handbook was very important and she confirmed with the City Manager that it would come <br />before the Council sometime in the near future. She supported the $1 per voter as the limit, a <br />voluntary signing of the pledge with the stipulation that people have the right to respond to hit <br />pieces, supported electronic filing, supported links that would provide the State and County's <br />websites and was not sure if she would support a contribution limit. <br />Councilmember Cook-Kallio supported electronic filing, transparency, said the City was <br />handcuffed by the federal election laws and the Supreme Court, she did not support making up <br />rules just to feel better about the process as the outcome would be more complicated. She <br />discussed the effects of "bundling", supported the opportunity to refund contributions, said most <br />cities that have a voluntary expenditure limit or a contribution limit have one or the other but not <br />both. She wanted people to be honest in the money they give to candidates, agrees there is <br />negative campaigning, and was not in favor of making the rules more complicated which would <br />result in less transparency. If voluntary expenditure limit was established, the $1 per voter was <br />reasonable with the exception of a mayoral race, which may run higher. There are many rules <br />that one would have to look at in establishing a voluntary pledge, such as fines, special <br />elections, exemptions, accounting and costs incurred as candidates, advantages as <br />incumbents, and she suggested the Council have as much transparency as possible and make <br />sure it is not complicated. She said there are too many things the Council cannot control such <br />as member to member communications, and little could be done at the local level until there is <br />federal campaign finance reform. She did not support individual contribution limits. <br />Councilmember Sullivan agreed there have been expediential increases in both direct <br />contributions to candidates and independent expenditures in PACs. He supported transparency, <br />electronic filing, and future real time software. He cited increases to both contributions and <br />expenditures over the years, said the reporting period should cover as many days as possible <br />before and after an election, liked the 7 day cut off period, said he got a negative hit piece, had <br />no money left or time to respond, and he felt integrity of the system was more important than <br />being able to respond to a hit piece. He was in favor of a voluntary pledge which should apply <br />during the entire election period, in favor of an ethics pledge the candidates would take or a <br />pledge that discourages certain actions, supported $1 per voter which prevents huge <br />expenditures of campaign funds, suggested an escalation factor indexed to the CPI, did not <br />agree there should be a penalty established, and agrees if there is a voluntary pledge of <br />expenditures then the contribution limit would be irrelevant. <br />Mayor Hosterman agreed that money raised and spent has gotten out of control, supported <br />transparency, electronic filing, was not interested in placing limits on campaign contributions, <br />liked the voluntary expenditure limit to $1 per voter and supported an ethics pledge. <br />City Council Minutes 7 December 18, 2007 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.