HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 12-02 CC ADJ AGENDA PKTAGENDA OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM
CIVIC CENTER
1243 NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD
NATIONAL CITY, CA
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1997 - 2:00 P.M.
WORKSHOP MEETING
ROLL CALL
1. Voluntary Campaign Expenditure Limits Under Proposition 208
PUBLICE ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT
Next Regular City Council Meeting — Tuesday, December 2, 1997, 3:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, Civic Center
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
MEETING DATE December 2, 1997
AGENDA ITEM NO 1
ITEM TITLE
PREPARED BY
EXPLANATION.
VOLUNTARY CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE LIMITS UNDER PROPOSITION 208
George H. Eiser, III
See attached memorandum
DEPARTMENT City Attorney
X
Environmental Review N/A
Financial Statement
N/A
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff concerning possible preparation of ordinance.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below) Resolution No
Memorandum
A -.cc -'.. °11c1
City of National City
Office of the City Attorney
1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950
George H. Eiser, III • City Attorney
(619) 336-4220 FAX (619) 336-4327 TDD (619) 336-1615
TO: Mayor and City Council DATE:
October 16, 1997
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Voluntary Campaign Expenditure Limits Under Proposition 208
Proposition 208 was approved by the voters at the November 5, 1996 election, eff ctive
January 1, 1997. Last December, prior to Proposition 208 taking effect, memorandum summarizing its provisions. e` Idistributed. the
Proposition 208 applies to every campaign for state and local office in California.--: �With very
few exceptions (mostly related to slate mailers and disclosure of the .sponsor of
adver sements), Proposition 208 does not apply to ballot measure campai-s_ For cities, this
means that Proposition 208 will likely not apply to recall elections, because they have been
held to be ballot measure elections. However, Proposition 208 will apply to car* npaiy s for
candidates to replace officials subject to a recall. Also, most of Proposition 208will not
to local tax elections, which may become more prevalent after i
��-ale:�_ art2. the passae or Preposition 213.
issue which was discussed on page three of my memorandum, but which has not yet been
determined by the City Council, is that of the voluntary expendinre limits authorized by
Proposition 208. Proposition 208 does not require that expenditure limits be established, but
permits cities to establish voluntary expenditure ceilings or up to SI or less per resident ror
each election in the city. A hiczher expenditure limitation may also be estabiis ed. but only by
voter approval.
If the City Council adopts a voluntary expenditure ceiling, candidates must file with the FPPC
a statement of acceptance or rejection of the ceiling before accepting ,any contributions. (With certain exceptions, candidates may not accept contributions more than six (6) mcnt.'is prior :o
an election). If a candidate Pr—pcs the expenditure ceiling, he/she is subjec: to a cont,i.budon
limitation of 32.5
per Contributor (i.e., Individual, business, union, PAC)election,
than. SW() per contributor c establishedper e.th en, rather
perelec ion as by Proposition 208. In the case
small contributor committee," theof a
contribution limitation is increased from 5200 to S.500 per
contributor per election.'
Under ?rcposidon 2C3, eonaibudons co a commie- that conc-ibures to a candidate are limited to S.:C) per
calendar
year.
although
irre mz1�s indcpenn: nt expenditures of SI.CCA or more opposing or
PPa..na a
3 tide commimay not accept any conaibution in excess of $=S
Addiricnally, contributions to political party committees are C xy election.
r.he
coaaibuaon limitations would not be affected bylimited to dintre per caleadar year. These
imposition of an expenditure ceiling.
Pmcor
October 16, 1997
Page Two
If the City Council adopts voluntary expenditure limits, Proposition 208 requires that local
election officials designate on the ballot, in the ballot pamphlet, and in the sample ballot,
which candidates have accepted the voluntary expenditure limits.
Once a candidate who does not accept the expenditure ceiling raises or spends 75% of the
recommended expenditure ceiling for that office, the voluntary expenditure ceiling for other
candidates in the same race will automatically triple. If an independent expenditure committee
or committees in the aggregate spend 50% or more of the applicable expenditure ceiling in
support of or in opposition to any candidate, the other candidates' voluntary expenditure
ceiling automatically triples. If an independent expenditure committee or committees in the
aggregate spend 25% or more of the applicable expenditure ceiling in support of or in
opposition to any candidate, the other candidates' voluntary expenditure ceiling. automatically
doubles. _
The total aggregate amount a candidate may receive from entities, other individuals, small
contributor committers, and political party committees is limited to 25% of the voluntary
expenditure limit. Likewise, no more than 25% of the voluntary expenditure limit shall be
accepted in cumulative contributions for any election from all political party committees.
It is unclear what the consequences are when a candidate accepts voluntary expenditure
limitations but then breaks the agreement. It would appear that this would constitute a
violation of the Political Reform Act; however, applying the Act's penalties would convert a
"voluntary' ceiling to a `mandatory' ceiling.
In the 1976 landmark case of Buckley v. Valeo, the United States Supreme Court held that
mandatory expenditure limits unconstitutionally impair the free speech rights of candidates
and contributors. However, the court also held that voluntary expenditure limits, when
accompanied by a government benefit such as public matching funds, are constitutional.
Because Pr2oposition 208 does not require matching funds, it is not clear whether the fact that
any expenditure limits are voluntary would alone render its provisions defensible against a
constitutional challenge. Proposition 208 attempts to overcome this potential problem with
constitutionality with other less costly incentives, discussed above.
In the case of candidates for state office who comply with the voluntary ceilings, Proposition
208 requires election officials to print candidates' statements in the sample ballot for free.
That requirement does not apply to local jurisdictions, apparently to avoid imposing an
unfunded State mandate. The absence of that incentive in local campaians, however, makes
local voluntary expenditure limits somewhat more vulnerable to constitutional challenge.
Therefore, if the City Council intends to impose a voluntary expenditure ceiling, the Council
may wish to consider providing the additional incentive of printing candidates' statements at
no cost for candidates who agree to accept the voluntary expenditure Iimit.
2 It is not certain that these expenditure limits apply to local (e.g. city) offices.
October 16, 1997
Page Three
Lastly, in considering whether to impose voluntary expenditure limits, the following
contribution limits, already imposed by Proposition 208, should be kept in mind. These
limits are in effect whether or not voluntary expenditure limits are enacted.
a. Ban on Transfers Between Candidates: Candidates and their
controlled committees may not make any contribution of campaign funds to any
other candidate running for office or to the other candidate's controlled
committee. A candidate may contribute personal funds to his or her own
campaign in unlimited amounts, or to another candidate subject to applicable
contribution limits.
b. Limits on Members of Appointed Boards and Commissions:
Appointees to boards and commissions may not contribute to, or solicit or
accept any contribution for, the person who made the appointment to that
office. This means, for example, that Planning Commissioners are prohibited
from contributing to or raising funds on behalf of the counciimembers who
made the appointment.
c. Ban on Lobbyists' Contributions: Candidates and officeholders may
not accept contributions from any registered state or lodal lobbyists if that
lobbyist finances, is engaged in, or is authorized to lobby the governmental
agency of the office being sought.
d. Time Limits on Campaign Fund Raising: Candidates in jurisdictions
with fewer than 1,000,000 residents may solicit and accept contributions only
during the period between six (6) months prior to the election and 90 days after
the election. Post -election contributions may be raised only if the campaivi has
outstanding debt.
e. Limits on Loans to Campaigns: Every loan and extension of credit to
a candidate or committee will be considered a contribution from the maker of
the loan and is subject to all contribution limits. A candidate may loan his or
her personal funds to the candidate's campaign committee up to a limit of
320,000 in outstanding loans at any one time.
f. Limits on Surplus Funds: Funds remaining in a campaign account at
the end of an election may not be carried -over for a subsequent election.
Within 90 days after the election, candidates must dispose of their remaining
funds by either returning the funds to contributors pro-rata, donating the funds
to a political party, or turning the funds over to the General Fund. Successful
candidates may transfer up to 310,000 to an officeholder fund for payment of
the expenses of communicating with constituents or carrying -out the official's
duties.
October 16, 1997
Page Four
If the City Council decides to impose voluntary expenditure limits, an implementation
ordinance will be prepared and submitted for Council approval at a future meeting.
GHE/gmo
Attachment
e\pr v2Cs.da
got: al
GEORGE H. EISER, III
City Attorney
City of National City
Office of the City Attorney
1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950
George H. Eiser, Ill • City Attorney
(619) 336-4220 FAX (619) 336-4327 TDD (619) 336-1615
TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: December 17, 1996
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Proposition 208; California Political Reform Act of 1996
BACKGROL'D
As you know, Proposition 208 was approved by the voters at the November 5, 1996
election. Proposition 208, which takes effect January 1, 1997, amends the Political
Reform Act (Government Code Section 81000 et sec") to add new contribution and
spending limits for local office holders, to revise disclosure requirements for contributions
and expenditures, and to expand the penalty provisions of the Act.
Following is a summary of the major provisions of these amendments. All statutory
references are to the Government Code.
LIMITATIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS
Section 85301 Emits condibutions to a candidate for local office in a jurisdiction with
fewer than 100,00 residents to S100 per concibutor per election, and imposes a
contribution Emit of 3250 for candidates in jurisdictions of 100,000 or more residents.
Generally, contributions to a committee that contributes to a candidate are limited to S500
per calendar year. These limitations do not apply to a candidate's contribution of his or
her personal funds to his or her own campaign committee; they do apply to contributions
from a spouse.
Section 85302 provides that the contribution limit for "small contributor committees" is
two times the limit set forth in Section 85301. Pursuant to Section 85203, a "sriiall
contributor committee" means any committee which meets the following criteria:
(a) It has a membership of at least 100 individuals.
(b) All the contributions it receives from any person in a calendar year
total fifty dollars (350) or less.
(c) It has been in existence at least six months.
(d) It is not a candidate -controlled committee.
}dcd aap-
December 17, 1996
Page 2
Section 35306 prohibits a candidate from making a contribution to any other candidate.
However, a candidate may make a contribution of his or her personal funds to his or her
own candidacy or to the candidacy of any other candidate for office.
Section 85307 provides that a candidate may not personally make a Lean of more than
S20,000 to his or her campaign or campaign committee, but may make unlimited
contributions to his or her own campaign.
Section 85311 provides that a contribution made by a business entry, labor organization,
association, political party or other group of persons shall be considered to be made by
a single person.
Section 85313 permits an elected officer to establish an "officeholder expo 'is., fund" for
expenses relating. to assisting, serving or communicating with constirueats, or with
carrying out the official duties of the elected officer, provided aggregate contributions to
such a fund do not exceed 310,000 within any calendar year and that the expenditures are
not made in connection with any campaign for elective office or ba ct measure. Section
85313 prohibits a person from malting contributions totaling mcre than 5250 during a
calendar year. Contributions to an officeholder account are not considered campaign
cent butions. Contributions from a lobbyist are prohibited if the Lobbyist is authorized
to engage in lobbying the governmental agency of the oilicehc:der. Section 85313
requires that all expenditures from and contributions to the officeholder account are
subject to Campaign disclosure and reporting requirements of the Act. Lastly, all funds
remaining in an ofnnce:icIder account when the officer leaves office are to be turned over
to the state General Fund.
1'LvflNG OF CONTRIBUTIONS
Section 85305 provides that in jurisdictions of fewer than 1,000,000 residents, candidates
may not accept contributions more than six months prior to an election_ The time limit
for accepting contributions is 12 months in jurisdictions of 1,000,CC0 or more residents.
Further, Section 85305 provides that no candidate shall accept contributions more than
90 days after the election. Contributions accepted up to 90 days after t:e election shall
be used only to pay outstanding bills or debts owed by the candida:e or the candidate's
controlled committee. Exceptions are provided for retiring debts incur ed with respect
to an election held prior to January 1, 1997 if certain criteria are met, and for payment
of attorney's fees arising out of alleged election law violations, for payment of fines or
assessments for violations of the Act, for payment of expenses for recounts or election
contests, for costs of external audits and for tax liabilities. Under Sec ion 89519, any
campaign funds remaining in excess of expenses incurred for the campaign are considered
surplus funds, and may be deposited in the amount of up to 310,000 in the officeholder
December 17, 1996
Page 3
account, with any remaining surplus distributed to any political party, returned to
contributors, or turned over to the state General Fund.
VOLUNTARY EXPENDITURE CEILLNGS
Section 85400 provides that a municipality may establish voluntary expenditure ceilings
for candidates at S1.00 or less per resident.
Section 85401 provides that each candidate shall file a statement of acceptance or
rejection of the voluntary expenditure ceiling before accepting any contributions. If the
candidate accepts the expenditure ceiling, the candidate is subject to a contribution
limitation of S250 in a jurisdiction with fewer than 100,000 residents, and S500 in a
jurisdiction of 100,000 or more residents. If a candidate declines to accept the
expenditure ceiling-, his or her contributions are subject to the limitation of Section 85301.
Section 85404 provides that if a candidate declines to accept volunmr expenditure
ceilings and receives contributions, has cash on hand, or makes qualified expenditures
equal to 75 percent or more of the recommended expenditure ceiling for that office, the
voluntary expenditure ceiling shall then be three times the amount of the established
expenditure ceiling. Similar provisions apply to expenditures by political party
committees and by independent expenditure committees.
INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES
Section 85500 provides that any committee that makes independent expenditures of more
than S1,000 in support of or in opposition to any candidate shall notify the filing officer
and all candidates running for the same seat by facsimile transmission or overnight
delivery each time this threshold is met. Any committee that makes independent
expenditures of 31,000 or more supporting or approving a candidate shad not accept any
contribution in excess of S250 per election. Any contributor that makes a contribution
of $100 or more per election to a candidate for elective office shall be considered to be
acting in concert with that candidate and shall not make independent expenditures and
contributions which in combination exceed the amounts set forth in Section 85301 in
support of that candidate or in opposition to that candidate's opponent or opponents.
ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION REOLTREIEtiTS
Section 85700 prohibits a contribution of 5100 or more into a campaign chec'.dng account
unless the name, address, occupation and employer of the contributor is an file in the
records of the recipient of the contribution.
December 17, 1996
Page 4
Section 85701 provides that any person who accepts a contribution which is not from the
person listed on the check or subsequent campaign disclosure statement shall be liable to
pay the state the entire amount of the laundered contribution.
Section 85702 provides that with certain exceptions, contributions made directly or
indirectly to or on behalf of a particular candidate through an intermediary or conduit
shall be treated as contributions from the contributor and the intermediary or conduit to
the candidate for purposes of the limitation of Section 85700.
Section 85703 provides that no person shall make and no person, other than a candidate
or the candidate's controlled committee, shall accept any contribution on the condition
or with the agreement that it will be contributed to any particular candidate. The
expenditure of funds received by a person shall be made at the sole discretion of the
recipient person.
Section 85704 provides that no elected officeholder, candidate, or the candidate's
controlled committee may solicit or accept a campaign contribution or contribution to an
of .ceholder account from, through, or arranged by a registered stare or local lobbyist if
that lobbyist finances, engages, or is authorized to engageinlobbying the governmental
ental
agency for which the candidate is seeking electionagency �e or t`i., governmental a� _icy of t:,,
officeholder.
Section 8570E provides that the governing body of a local jurisdiction may impose lower
contribution limitations, and more stringent disclosures or prohibitions, than those set
forth in the Act. A local jurisdiction may establish higher contribution or expenditure
limitations, but only by a vote of the people.
DISCLOSURE
Section 84201 establishes a threshold of S 100 for contributions and expenditures required
to be reported in campaign statements.
Under Section 35305.5, a slate mailer organization or committee formed to support a
ballot measure must include the name, street address, and ciry of the slate mailer
organization or committee on the outside of each piece of slate mail and on every insert
within each piece of slate mail.
ADVERTISEN EN"TS
Section 84501 defines "advertisement" as any general or public advertisement which is
authorized and paid for by a person or committee for the purpose of supporting, or
December 17, 1996
Page 5
opposing a candidate for elective office or a ballot measure(s). "Advertisement" does not
include a communication from an organization other than a political party to its members,
a campaign button smaller than 10 inches in diameter, a bumper sticker smaller than 60
square inches, or other advertisement as determined by regulations of the FPPC.
Section 84503 requires any advertisement for or against any ballot measure to include a
disclosure statement identifying any person whose cumulative contributions are 350,000
or more.
ENFORCEMENT
Section 83116 increases the maximum penalty for violation of the Political Reform Act
from 32500 to 35000.
Under Section 83116.5, criminal as well as civil penalties maybe pursued against those
who purposely or negligendy cause violations by another.
CONCLUSION
Undoubtedly, many of the provisions of Proposition 208 will be interpreted and clarified
by the courts and through the adoption of administrative regulations by the FPPC. In the
short term, should any questions arise as to the application of these provisions to specific
situations, I am avRi fable for discussion.
GEORGE h. EISER. II_
City Attorney
GHE!sbc
cc: City Manager