Council To Vote On Changing LB's Voter-Enacted Campaign Reform Act To Let Candidates Divert Their Campaign Funds To Any Other Candidate For Federal, State, Local Races And Remove Tougher-Than-Sac'to Req't To Disclose Contributors' Names/Occupations
(Nov. 9, 2014, 6:35 a.m.) -- At the City Council's upcoming November 11 meeting [to be held in Houghton Park], Councilmembers could vote to change portions of LB's 1994 Campaign Reform Act to enable themselves, or other Council candidates, for the first time to divert sums collected by their Council election/re-election campaigns to instead benefit other politicians seeking different political offices.
Such transfers are currently prohibited under the Campaign Reform Act enacted by Long Beach voters in 1994 [whose primary Council proponent at the time was Councilan Alan Lowenthal.].
[Scroll down for further below.]
By striking the first few words (text below) of part of LB's current law, candidates could transfer, loan or contribute their campaign funds to any other candidate for local, State or federal elective office. For example, individuals who gave money to candidate X seeking one city office would no longer be sure it would be used to elect that candidate; isntead, a candidate (especially one with large cash reserves or an easy upcoming election) could give a portion of his/her campaign sums to another candidate(s) running for some entirely different LB, county, state or federal office. Such transactions are allowed under Sacramento-enacted laws, but were prohibited by LB voters.
LB Muni Code section 2.01.390 would be amended as follows:
Campaign funds or O officeholder funds may not be used as a transfer, loan, or contribution to any other candidate for local, State or federal elective office.
In addition, LB Muni Code section 2.01.730, which currently requires disclosure of the occupation and employer of the person making a contribution of over $100, would be deleted in its entirety.
2.01.730 Disclosure of occupation and employer.
No contribution of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or more shall be deposited into a campaign checking account unless the name, address, occupation and employer of the contributor is on file in the records of the recipient of the contribution.
The City Attorney's office has recommended deletion of the section, explaining in a memo discussing the proposed changes a few months earlier: "State law requires the contribution to be refunded if the donor's information is not obtained within 60 days. If the donations cannot be refunded (e.g. no address or phone #) the funds are required to be turned over to the state's general fund or local jurisdiction's general fund."
[Comment: LBREPORT.com has argued editorially that refunds mean little if delayed until after the election; in our view, this change could invite candidates to try and "game the system" during the last sixty days of a campaign.]
The proposed changes were recommended to the City Council on Sept. 16 by the Council's Elections Oversight Committee (chair Gonzalez, plus Uranga and Mungo) within 60 days of the new Council majority taking office. At the Sept. 16 Council meeting, Councilmembers voted 8-0 (Lowenthal absent) to have the City Attorney's office draft text now before them.
The City Attorney's office has indicated that two Council votes requiring passage by a 2/3 margin are required to enact the changes.
Ssction 2.01.1240(A) of the 1994 LB voter enacted measure provides, "This Chapter may be amended from time to time by ordinance adopted by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the City Council upon a finding by the Council that such amendment is consistent with and in furtherance of the purposes of this Chapter."
