HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTIONS - 01011998 - 1998-112 .rD 5
The Board of Supervisors
of Contra Costa County
In the Matter of Resolution No. 981112
OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION 226
WHEREAS,Proposition 226 is an initiative on the June 2, 1998 Ballot; and
WHEREAS,Proposition 226 would require that employee organizations could not use
any money for candidate contributions on ballot initiatives,whether collected as dues or through
a voluntary political checkoff,unless it has been authorized annually by the member on a State
approved form; and
WHEREAS,Proposition 226 is unnecessary--members of employee organizations
already have the right to redirect money rather than make political contributions from their dues;
and
WHEREAS,Proposition 226 is unnecessary because foreign contributions to candidate
campaigns are already banned; and
WHEREAS,Proposition 22.6 is NOT real campaign reform,because it does nothing to
get at the real problems with campaign finance; and
WHEREAS,the unfunded paperwork nightmare created for the County(with over 7,000
employees)will be horrendous, forcing the County to keep detailed records on who and how an
employee chooses to make political contributions, and to redo these forms yearly and file them
with various state agencies; and
WHEREAS,Proposition 226 is UNFAIR because it singles out a group of employees for
special government intervention, leaving other individuals and groups without new rules; and
WHEREAS, it is not fair or equitable for employee organizations to have their voices
weakened so that they cannot be strong advocates for adequate funding for local government to
insure the basic needs of our community can be met when all other interest groups remain
unchecked.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of the County
of Contra Costa, California, strongly opposes Proposition 226 and urges all County voters to vote
NO.
PASSED by unanimous vote of the Board Members present on this 17th day of March,
1998.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution entered on the
minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid.
Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board
of Supervisors affixed on this 17th day of
March, 1998.
PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors and County Administrator
By:
Introduced by: Deputy
Supervisor Joe Canciamilla
District V
Contra
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS +t ...e Costa
a
FROM: Supervisor Joe Canciamilla - County
DATE: March 1 7, 1998
SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of the Attached Resolution
Opposing Proposition 226 on the June 2, 1998 Ballot
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION: Consider adoption of the attached resolution opposing Proposition 226 on
the June 2, 1998 Ballot.
BACKGROUND: Proposition 226 is an initiative which would require labor unions that contribute
money to the political campaigns of individuals and to support or oppose ballot measures through the
use of union dues to obtain written permission from their members once every twelve (12) months.
The measure is being supported and handled primarily by out-of-state business interests.
This measure would place controls on employee organizations alone. The largest contributors to
campaigns and lobbying efforts such as the A.M.A., C.M.A., Trial Lawyers, large corporations and
business interests would be unaffected.
The financial burden placed on the County by this measure could be substantial. Records will have
to be maintained and the appropriate accounting arrangements will need to be made.
Under current law union members subject to dues deduction have the ability to designate that any
portion of their dues designated for political purposes may be used for other purposes.
The sole purpose of this measure appears to be a targeting of labor unions and employee
organizations.
Equity would appear to require that if the desire is for campaign finance reform that these types of
rules would apply equally to all. For example, shareholders of large corporations could then be
required to give written authorization for corporate income being used for political purposes, or
business owners grant permission for a trade organizations political efforts.
Finally, the measure is another example of an unfunded local mandate against the general fund as
no provision for recapturing County costs is provided.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE.
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OM ND ION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF BOARD ON MAR _H 17, 1998, APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED: u OTHER:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS:
X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT )
AYES: NOES:
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY
OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: County Administrator
Supervisor Canciamilla ATTESTED &Z Zf
p.
PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY L ._..
D TY