Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10031995 - D1 DA THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on_October 3, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, DeSaulnier,Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Supervisors Smith, Bishop SUBJECT: Ordinance Introduced IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the Ordinance amending the Campaign Spending Reform Ordinance is INTRODUCED, reading waived,and October 10, 1995, FIXED for adoption. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED: _October 3, 1995 Phil Batchelor,Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By Deputy Cc: County Counsel County Administrator i i r D, COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MARTINEZ,CALIFORNIA Date: September 28, 1995 To: Board of Supervisors From: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel By:. Mary Ann McNett Mason, Deputy County Counsel R• WIV' Re: Draft amendments to campaign spending reform ordinance At its meeting of September 26, 1995, the Board of Supervisors directed this office to return for introduction on October 3, 1995 "Version A" of the draft amendments to the Campaign Spending Reform Ordinance. The Board initially considered "Version A" at its meeting of September 19, 1995 . The ordinance would amend Ordinance Code section 530-2 . 707 subsections (b) , (e) , and (g) and add uncodified section III in the form recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. The ordinance also includes uncodified section IV which contains Supervisor DeSaulnier' s proposal for treatment of contributions received prior to May 25, 1995 for elections occurring after that date. As we discussed in our memorandum of September 7, 1995, the modifications to the Campaign Spending Reform Ordinance which would result from adoption of this ordinance are as follows . 1 . Section 530-2 . 707 "Voluntary Expenditure Limits" subsection (b) "Time for filing statement adopting expenditure ceiling" would be amended to provide that a supervisorial candidate who chose to adopt the expenditure ceiling would have to file a statement adopting the ceiling for the primary election and, in the event of a runoff election, a separate statement adopting the ceiling for the runoff election. The candidate would be subject to the ceiling and would be eligible to collect expenditures at the higher level only for the particular election cycle for which the statement was filed. This proposal would afford the candidate the opportunity to adopt the expenditure ceiling as to either, neither, or both, the primary and runoff elections . 2 . Section 530-2 . 707 (e) "Notification by candidate who exceeds ceiling" would be modified to specify that all candidates, other than candidates who adopt the expenditure ceiling and qualify to spend an additional $10,000, must notify the County Clerk-election division when aggregate contributions exceeding $80, 000 are received Board of Supervisors -2- September 28, 1995 and\or when aggregate expenditures exceeding $80,000 are made. A candidate who adopted the expenditure ceiling and who qualified to spend an additional $10,000 must notify the County Clerk-election division when aggregate contributions exceeding $90, 000 are received and\or when aggregate expenditures exceeding $90, 000 are made. The amendment would further provide that if the day on which notice is required is not a business day, notice shall be given on the next business day. 3 . Subsection (g) "Adoption of Expenditure Ceiling Irrevocable" would be added to section 530-2 . 707 . This section would provide that if a candidate adopts the expenditure ceiling for a particular election cycle, i .e. the primary or general election cycle, the candidate cannot revoke adoption of the ceiling as to that cycle. 4 . As directed by the Internal Operations Committee, this ordinance also includes an alternate section "Revocation of Expenditure Ceiling. " This section would provide that it is operative only if a court of competent jurisdiction makes a final judicial determination that subsection (g) of section 530-2 . 707 is unenforceable. In that event, the alternate subsection would state the procedure for a candidate' s revocation of the expenditure ceiling. A candidate would have to return all excess contributions to contributors and excess personal loans before he or she could make expenditures which exceed the limit. In addition, the candidate would have to notify the elections division of the revocation and of the return of contributions and personal loans . The decision whether to include such an alternate subsection is a difficult one because such language may tend to invite challenges to the validity of subsection (g) of section 530-2 . 707 . To direct the focus away from questioning the validity of subsection (g) , the draft ordinance would include the alternate section as uncodified Section III which would not appear in the ordinance code. The section would be referenced in the codified version by a note to refer to the original ordinance. Alternatively, the Board may choose to adopt a version of the amendments which does not include alternate Section III . If the Board chooses to do that, alternate pages 4 and 5 of the ordinance are included for introduction. 5 . Section IV would add an uncodified section which would provide as follows : (A) Supervisorial candidates are not subject to civil or criminal sanction for receipt of contributions or making of personal loans prior to May 25, 1995, if such contributions or loans were lawful when received or made, whether or not such contributions or loans would have exceeded the respective limitations on contributions or personal loans effective May 25, 1995 . (B) A supervisorial candidate is not required to refund all or a portion of a contribution received prior to May 25, 1995, if such contribution was lawful when received. Board of Supervisors -3- September 28, 1995 (C) Campaign expenditures made prior to May 25, 1995 for an election occurring after that date do not count toward the voluntary expenditure ceiling. (Section 530-2 . 707 . ) (D) Personal loans made by a candidate before May 25, 1995 are not chargeable against the limits on personal loans effective May 25, 1995 . (Section 530-2 . 706 . ) (E) Contributions received prior to May 25, 1995 are not chargeable against the individual, broadbased committee, or cumulative contribution limits . (Sections 530-2 . 703; 530-2 . 704; 530- 2 . 705 . ) Thus, candidates would start with a clean slate as of May 25, 1995 . MAM\am attachments cc: County Administrator District Attorney Attn: James Sepulveda, Deputy District Attorney County Clerk-Recorder Attn: Barbara Lee, Assistant County Registrar ORDINANCE NO. 95- (Adoption of voluntary campaign expenditure ceiling) The Contra Costa County Board of. Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County Ordinance Code) . SECTION I . SUMMARY. This Ordinance amends section 530-2 . 707 of Campaign Spending Reform Ordinance to specify that a runoff candidate must file a separate statement accepting the voluntary campaign expenditure ,ceiling. The Ordinance also amends that section to clarify when candidates must give notice that they have received contributions or made expenditures exceeding the applicable voluntary expenditure ceiling. This ordinance specifies that adoption of the voluntary expenditure ceiling for an election cycle is irrevocable as to that cycle . This ordinance adds an uncodified section clarifying the Board' s intent that expenditures made prior to May 25 , 1995 shall not count toward the voluntary expenditure ceiling; personal loans made prior to that date shall not count toward the limitations on personal loans; contributions accepted prior to May 25, 19.95 shall not count toward the limitations on individual, broad based committee or cumulative contributions effective after that date. SECTION II . Section 530-2 . 707 is amended to read: 530-2 . 707 Voluntary expenditure limits (a ) Statement accepting expenditure ceiling. All candidates , other than recall candidates , who adopt the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (c) may accept contributions in the amounts specified in section 530-2 . 703, subsection (b) and section 530-2 . 704 , subsection (b) . All recall candidates who adopt the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (c ) may accept contributions in the amounts specified in section 530-2 . 703 , subsection (c ) and section 530-2 . 704 , subsection ( c ) . All candidates who adopt the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (c ) may loan their campaigns money up to the amount specified in section 530-2 . 706 , subsection (b) . Before accepting any contributions or making any loans within the amounts specified in sections 530-2 . 703, subsections (b) and (c ) , 530-2 . 704 , subsections (b) and (c ) , and 530-2 . 706 , subsection (b) , a candidate for a primary, general, or recall election must file with the County Clerk- election division a statement, signed under penalty of perjury, which states that the candidate adopts the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (c ) below. ORDINANCE NO. 9,5- 1 C (b) Time for filing statement adopting expenditure ceiling . The statement may be filed by a candidate, other than a recall candidate, at any time after that date which is twelve months before the date of the primary election for the office and until such time as the candidate files his or her declaration of candidacy. In the event the candidate is not elected to office in the primary election, enters the runoff election, and wishes to adopt the expenditure ceiling for the election cycle for the general election, the candidate must file a separate statement . Such statement may be filed at any time after the primary election results are final until thirty days prior to the general election. A recall candidate may file the statement adopting the expenditure ceiling at any time after the date the recall measure is certified for the ballot until thirty days before the recall election. (c ) Amount of expenditure ceiling. During an election cycle, candidates who agree to accept the voluntary expenditure ceiling shall not incur campaign expenditures exceeding eighty thousand dollars ( $80 , 000 ) , except as set forth in subsection (d) below. (d) Contributions from individuals . During an election cycle, a candidate who accepts the voluntary expenditure ceiling and who raises twenty percent of the amount of that ceiling in contributions of less than one hundred dollars ( $100 ) from individuals residing in the supervisorial district in which the candidate stands for election, may incur ten thousand dollars ( $10 , 000 ) in campaign expenditures in addition to that amount permitted in subsection (c ) . (e) Notification by candidate who exceeds ceiling. A candidate, other than a candidate who has accepted the voluntary expenditure ceiling and has qualified to incur additional campaign expenditures as specified in subsection (d) , who receives aggregate contributions exceeding the amount of the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (c ) shall notify the County Clerk-election division by both telephone and guaranteed overnight mail on the day such contributions exceeding that amount are received 'A candidate other than a candidate who has accepted the voluntary expenditure ceiling and has qualified to incur additional campaign expenditures as specified in subsection (d) , who makes aggregate expenditures exceeding the amount of the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (c) shall notify the County Clerk-election division by both telephone and guaranteed overnight mail on the day such expenditures exceeding that amount are made . A candidate who has accepted the voluntary expenditure ceiling and has qualified to incur additional campaign expenditures as specified in subsection ('d) , who receives aggregate contributions exceeding the amount of the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (d) shall notify the County ORDINANCE NO. 95- 2 Clerk-election division by both telephone and guaranteed overnight mail on the day such contributions exceeding that amount are received. A candidate who has accepted the voluntary expenditure ceiling and has qualified to incur additional campaign expenditures as specified in subsection (d) , who makes aggregate expenditures exceeding the amount of the expenditure ceiling specified in subsection (d) shall notify the County Clerk-election division by both telephone and guaranteed overnight mail on the day such expenditures exceeding that amount are made. If the day on which notice is required is not a business day, notice shall be given on the next business day. ( f ) Exclusions . For purposes of this Article, expenditures subject to the expenditure ceiling do not include: ( 1 ) expenditures for campaigns for other offices ; ( 2 ) expenditures for campaigns for the office of Supervisor which occurred prior to the effective date of this ordinance; ( 3 ) expenditures for office holder expenses . "Office holder expenses " means those expenditures arising out of the office holder' s official duties which directly assist the office holder in performing his official duties , or which directly relate to a governmental purpose . "Office holder expenses" include but are not limited to, (a) donations to charitable organizations ; (b) the cost of tickets to political events; -(c ) the cost of postage, office supplies , stationary and similar expenses related to the conduct or performance of the office holder' s governmental duties ; (d) reasonable expenses for travel to conferences , seminars, educational events and similar activities related to the office holder' s position; (e) the cost of books or publications reasonably related to the office holder' s position; ( f ) litigation expenses related to the office holder' s actions as a supervisor. The expenses listed in items (a) through ( f ) shall not be considered "office holder expenses" if they are used in connection with any office holder' s campaign for a future term of office as a Supervisor. (gl Adoption of expenditure ceiling irrevocable. A candidate who adopts the expenditure ceiling for the election cycle for a particular primary election, may not thereafter revoke his or her adoption of the expenditure ceiling as to that election cycle . A candidate who is not elected to office in the primary election, enters the runoff election, and adopts the expenditure ceiling for the election cycle as to that general election, may not thereafter revoke his or her adoption of the expenditure ceiling as to that election cycle . (Ords . 95- § 2 ; 95-35 ; 95-8 . ) ORDINANCE NO. 95- 3 1 SECTION III . REVOCATION OF ADOPTION OF VOLUNTARY EXPENDITURE CEILING. This section shall become operative only in the event that a court of competent jurisdiction makes a final judicial determination that subsection (g) of section 530-2 . 707 is unenforceable . A candidate who has adopted the voluntary expenditure ceiling and who has accepted contributions and\or made personal loans in the amounts applicable to candidates adopting the ceiling, and who then determines to revoke his or her adoption of the ceiling must do the following at least three business days before the candidate may make expenditures in excess of the ceiling: ( 1 ) return the balance of any contribution exceeding the contribution limit applicable to candidates not adopting the ceiling to the individual or broadbased committee contributor and return the balance of any loan the candidate has made to his or her campaign which exceeds the limitation on personal loans applicable to candidates not adopting the ceiling; and ( 2 ) file with the County Clerk- elections division a statement, signed under penalty of perjury, which states that the candidate has revoked adoption of the voluntary expenditure ceiling and has returned the balance of all contributions and loans exceeding the limits applicable to a candidate who has not adopted the ceiling. The statement shall contain a list of all contributors to whom monies were returned and the amounts thereof . SECTION IV. EFFECT OF CONTRIBUTION RECEIVED OR LOAN OF MONEY OR EXPENDITURE OF MONEY MADE BEFORE MAY 25 1995 . No supervisorial candidate or his or her campaign treasurer shall be subject to criminal or civil sanction for receipt of a contribution prior to May 25 , 1995 if such contribution was lawful when received, whether or not the amount of such contribution would have exceeded the contribution limits for supervisorial candidates effective May 25 , 1995 . Nothing in this section shall require a candidate or his or her campaign treasurer .to refund all or a portion of a contribution received prior to May 25, 1995 if such contribution was lawful when received. No supervisorial candidate shall be subject to criminal or civil sanction for making a personal loan to his or her campaign prior to May 25, 199.5 if such loan was lawful when made, whether or not the amount of such loan would have exceeded the limitations on personal loans effective on May 25 , 1995 . Campaign expenditures made by a candidate prior to May 25 , 1995 for an election occurring after that date do not count toward the voluntary expenditure ceiling specified in section 530-2 . 707 subsections (c ) , (d) . Personal loans made by a candidate prior to May 25, 1995 shall not be chargeable against the limitations on personal loans specified in section 530-2 . 706 . Contributions received prior to May 25 , 1995 shall not be chargeable against the limits on individual contributions specified in section 530-2 . 703, or against the limits on broad based committee contributions specified in section 53.0-2 . 704 , or against the limits on cumulative contributions specified in section 530-2 . 710 . ORDINANCE NO. 95- 4 SECTION V. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after .passage, and within 15 days after passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors voting for and against it in the a newspaper published in this County. PASSED ON , by the following vote: AYES: NOES : ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board and County Administrator By: Deputy Board Chair [SEAL] ORDINANCE NO. 95- 5 GARY T. YANCEY District Attorney h` „4T. 7 �'•Vit. t OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT .ATTORNEY COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA TO: Mary Ann McNett Mason Deputy County Counsel FROM: James L Sepulveda . n�(M Deputy District Attorne DATE: September 'S, 1995 SUBJECT: County Campaign Spending Reform Ordinance Based upon my review of the latest version of the County Campaign Spending Reform Ordinance, dated , August 30, 1995, I have the following comments : 1. As to section 530-2 .707 (8) and (h) , I have alreadyexpressed my concern about the constitutionality of (g) . However, if the Board decides that it wants to go forward and adopt (g) , I. would-strongly suggest that subsection (h) be deleted. Inclusion of subsection, . (h) only raises a red flag to candidates that subsection (g) may not be enforceable. Further, if subsection (g) had to be litigated, inclusion of subsection (h) could be interpreted by the court as an admission of or at least a deep concern about the illegality of subsection (g) . The bottom line is that legally speaking I would much prefer to see subsection (h) adopted (minus the first sentence, of course) and delete subsection (g) . In my view, the ordinance could not be successfully attacked. under this scenario. However, if the Board wants ' to test the legal waters and adopt (g)., then let ' s be firm. about it and not equivocate and also adopt (h) . 2 . As to -Section III, . I much prefer. Version A to Version B. Of the two choices, Version A is much clearer and easier. to enforce. Version A is also not- subject to legal challenge whereas I' have some question about, the legality of retroactively changing the rules of the game. Under Version B, money that. was legally raised by a candidate to spend on reelection now 'could not., be spent on reelection? What if a .pre May 25, 1995 contribution was in the amount- of $200?: Is the candidate now required to. refund $100 even though the contribution was within the legal limits when made? If such candidate refused to make such a refund, I believe ex post facto prohibitions would prevent prosecution for .exceeding the new campaign limits It is my view that .trying to retroactively apply a new . law to past events only leads to trouble. It is best to start fresh. and have the new ordinance apply prospectively only.