Consider Directing the City Clerk to Work with the City Attorney in Crafting an Ordinance to Provide City Funding to Pay Administrative Election Costs to Reduce Financial Barriers of Running for Office.  (Councilmember Daysog) [Not heard on December 6, 2016]
As some people know, and I know there's provisions to take care of some of these things. But if there's a small field near the build that you get at the very end, after all the all the hype of winning and all the feelings of of losing a subside, the city presents you with a bill for principle. On. The ballot. So I think. That's a significant cost. I think, again, it's worth looking at. And that's why I think this should go for. And I think it's also worth looking at the effect of of large contributions into campaigns, regardless of where they come from. And I'd like us to have a a maybe even have a subcommittee of the city council do this work. Because some of this work was done back in, I believe was 2012 by the Sunshine Committee. And I think it's, again, worth asking the question and then having I would recommend that the referral be slightly changed to have a subcommittee of the city council do this work and bring a recommendation to council. And I'd like to add that we include having staff look at an estimate of the costs. That be included. I think with any recommendation staff would it would go without saying that staff would have their usual impact to the general fund or wherever this money would come from to execute whatever the council decides to to consider. A member. I have a couple of quick comments and I appreciate my colleagues remarks on this. And for, you know, stepping in the shoes of our former council member and bringing this this referral, I have two issues. One, I am concerned about violations of the Sunshine Ordinance. If we give direction to staff on something that wasn't notice. And overhauling our campaign finance rules, I think is something that, you know, if we were going to do that folks in the community may be interested in commenting on rather than us doing it by amending a referral without public notice. So I would be against that at this point. And secondly, you know, I do have a little bit of an issue. You know, basically we're asking the city and the taxpayers to pay money. So us, we politicians, because that's what we are run for office. So instead of that 25,000 going to, you know, pay part of a salary for somebody who could help with landlord tenant issues or paying for a park person part time, we're basically asking them to pay for us to run for office. And, you know, I just have a philosophical disagreement with having the taxpayers pay for me to have the right to run for office. Because I think if if you're going to run, you know, and if you can't raise $3,000 to pay for your ballot statement, then, you know, maybe you don't have a lot of support in the community and. Member. Ashcroft, I would actually like to see a more independent body look into these questions. Perhaps the League of Women Voters that doesn't have a dog in the fight, so to speak. And I you know, I agree with my counsel, my colleague Jim Odey, that when you run for office, you do need to take into account that there are expenses. But hopefully you have supporters in the community who are willing to help defray that. But if we need to look at doing things a different way, I would like the the more, you know, arm's length independent view of an organization like the League of Women Voters if they are willing to take it on. And I actually think they've had some forums on campaign finance report reform in the past. So I, I suspect not wanting to speak on their behalf, although I am a member, but I think this might be something they'd be willing to take up. But I'm interested to hear what the rest of the council thinks. Vice Mayor What's one thing that that I, you know, have a little pause on is the fact that we did we did a review of this not so long ago. And, you know, we you know, my question would be, are we looking to override the work that was already performed and the the you know, the work of the Sunshine Committee actually looking at this matter, or are we trying to look at a new direction? You know, I was a campaign finance attorney before. And one of the things that that I do caution people on is the more rules and regulations we have, you know, campaign expenditures are considered a form of First Amendment protected speech . And so while you can you can limit contributions to candidates or or ballot measure committees, essentially the Supreme Court has held you can't cap what goes to independent expenditures. And so one of the things that I think has has really clouded the issues for many voters here in Alameda is not knowing where the money's from because there have been independent expenditures and that sort of thing. So I think getting a little more direction in terms of what we're trying to achieve and if it's something different from what we've looked at before. I also agree that having or at least starting out with an independent body and having them look at it would be my preference just because then it's really coming from the community. Thank you. So I support during this referral. I support leaving it though as the referral is noticed. And I think that that's a real clean question in regards to whether or not and after we find out what the expense would be, we should and I would say reduce the financial barrier to running for office. I think $3,000 is in fact quite a bit for some candidates. And when I at least when I was on the school board, the school board did pay that. We did not have to pay that fee. And so I see it as a financial barrier for some candidates, and I would at least be supportive of hearing this referral and getting staff's feedback on what they think the cost to the city would be. Um. Member matter. I see what you like to. I don't see that there's a majority that's willing to go farther than this. And I think it is correct in not adding additional items that weren't noticed. But I think the discussion needs to happen and perhaps in a different venue. And I don't it's my recollection, I don't recall the prior council looking at reducing the cost for Canada, so I don't think that issue has been discussed. I think that that is a new issue. I think the issue is that we looked at campaign finance reform earlier, not this particular. Issue, this issue. So I am. So did you want to make it personal? I don't know. I wasn't sure that everyone opposed going forward with this issue. So I. I will make a motion to proceed with the referral that had been member de SACS and limit it to. But the ask was here. Of finding. Exploring the city funding to pay the administrative election costs. To reduce financial barriers of. Running for office. They're a second. Doing, then that fails. And then I will proceed with five A, which is the Historical Advisory Board nomination and I will be nominating. First of all, I want to share that we had four candidates, three of whom I, along with staff, interviewed.