Council Votes <nobr>8-0</nobr> (Lowenthal Absent) To Pursue October Enacting Votes Rewriting Parts Of LB Political Contribution Law;

The City Attorney's office has indicated that the items below don't require a vote of the people and can be enacted with a 2/3 Council vote. The items could come to the first of two required ordinance enacting votes as soon as Oct. 7.

LBREPORT.com itemizes below the Sept. 16 Council agendizing text (left column) alongside the actions the Council voted to do take on September 16 (right column).

Proposed change	Council Action (8-0) on Sept. 16, 2014
2.01.390 Transfer of Funds. ~~Campaign funds and o~~ Officeholder funds may not be used as a transfer, loan or contribution to any other candidate for local, State or federal elective office. [City Attorney memo comment] "Recognize that campaigns are a political endeavor and enable campaign funds to be used to make contributions to other candidates."	The Council voted 8-0 (Lowenthal absent) to have the City Attorney's office draft an ordinance to make this change with the first of two required enacting votes coming as early as Oct. 7. Two Council votes, both with passage by a 2/3 margin, could enact the change; the City Attorney's office says voter approval isn't required. By striking the first few words of LB's current law, LB officeholders would be able to transfer, loan or contribute to any other candidate for local, State or federal elective office. In other words, those giving money to candidate X running for one city office would no longer be sure it would be used to elect that candidate; 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 other LB, county, state or federal office.
2.01.730 Disclosure of occupation and employer. DELETE [City Attorney office memo comment] "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."	This change reduces current minimal transparency. It would enable candidate campaigns to avoid or delay disclosing information about who's trying to elect them to office that is now legally required to be disclosed. "Refunds" mean nothing if they come after the election is over. The Council voted 8-0 (Lowenthal absent) to have the City Attorney's office draft an ordinance to make this change with the first of two required enacting votes coming as early as Oct. 7. Two Council votes, both with passage by a 2/3 margin, could enact the change; the City Attorney's office says voter approval isn't required.
Consideration of a legal defense fund	It's unclear for what purpose(s) such a "legal defense fund" would be available. To defend against challenges by whom and for what? The Council voted 8-0 to refer this item back to the Elections Oversight Committee (Gonzalez, Uranga, Mungo) for further discussion. This item would ultimately require enactment by a vote of the people.