Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance #3580 ORDINANCE NO. 3550 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING SECTION 2.07.050(b) OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITATON OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CAMPAIGN REFORM LAW WHEREAS,the City Council adopted in 1994 the "City of Huntington Beach Campaign Reform Law"; and The purpose of the Campaign Reform Law is to ensure that the financial strength of certain individuals or organizations would not permit them to exercise a disproportionate or controlling influence on the election of City candidates. Large contributions to candidates pose the actual and perceived threat of corruption in that large contributions could give rise to political quid pro quos, with candidates being more inclined to provide favors and attention to those individuals who contributed large sums to the candidate's campaign. In order to avoid both the appearance of and actual corruption, the Campaign Reform Law was designed to reduce the influence of large contributions and ensure that multiple contributions in excess of the contribution limits do not originate from the same source of funds; and The City Council finds it highly likely that a candidate for local office would notice the identities of individual contributors, regardless of whether the contribution was made directly to the candidate, or even to an independent person or committee that made an expenditure in favor of the candidate. This situation creates, at the very least, the possibility of an appearance of improper political influence. This situation could also give rise to the appearance that contributors are evading valid limitations on contributions to candidates by fumleling their contributions to independent expenditure committees, rather than directly to candidates, knowing full well that their contributions will be spent (albeit "independently") on behalf of the candidates; and At issue in the case entitled Lincoln Club v. City of Irvine, 292 F.3d 934 (9' Cir. 2002), was a challenge to a campaign regulation applicable to contributions made to persons or committees engaged in making independent; and In the Lincoln Club decision, the Ninth Circuit held that, to the extent the Irvine regulation prohibited any person or committee from making independent expenditures where they had accepted contributions in excess of the contribution limit amounts, it regulated campaign expenditures, not campaign contributions, and consequently, was subject to strict judicial scrutiny, a standard of judicial review under which virtually no legislation can survive; and Although the Huntington Beach Campaign Reform Law does not expressly state what happens if contributions to a person or committee in excess of the contribution limit are received, it was never the intent of the Campaign Reform Law to prohibit all expenditures by the recipient person or committee, but rather to enforce the contribution limit only; and 1 SF-2002 Ordinance:Campaign Contributions r ....... .. _ ....... To the extent that the contributions to the person or committee are within the maximum limit, independent expenditures still may be made. However, to the extent that they exceed the maximum contribution limit, they still give rise to actual, or the appearance of political quid pro quos, with candidates being more inclined to provide favors and attention to those individuals who contributed large sums to independent persons or committees, who spent the money in support of the candidate; and The City Council is desirous of codifying this interpretation to avoid further litigation; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That Section 2.07.050(b) of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Any person or committee, during the twelve (12) months preceding a City election, that makes independent expenditures or incurs obligations supporting or opposing city candidate(s) shall not accept any contribution(s) from any person in excess of the amounts set forth in Section 2.07.050(a) during the applicable time periods as set forth in Section 2.07.070 of this Chapter, provided that if the persons or committee accepts contributions in excess of said amounts, it shall not make expenditures in excess of the number of contributors multiplied by the contribution limit. This subsection does not prohibit individuals from making joint independent expenditures for purchasing advertisements and engaging in similar expressive activity, provided they pay the vendor directly and separately." SECTION 2. This codification of an existing administrative interpretation of the Campaign Reform Law should not be interpreted as excusing compliance with the California Political Reform Act, including the Political Reform Act's reporting requirements. SECTION 3. The City Council declares that this emergency ordinance is required for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety. Absent adoption of this ordinance, the effectiveness of the Campaign Reform Law is in doubt during the pendency of the November 2002 election. Therefore,pursuant to Section 501 of the City Charter, this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its affirmance by at least five of the members of the City Council. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. 2 SF-2002 Ordinance:Campaign Contributions PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of October , 2002. Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk No-l9-Uk City Attorney REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: Ci Administrator City Attorney 3 SF-2002 Ordinance:Campaign Contributions Emergency Ord. No. 3580 STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) 1, CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the.foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a r.egular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of October, 2002 and was passed and adopted by at least four-fifths (4I5) affirmative vote of said City Council. AYES: Green, Dettloff, Boardman, Cook, Houchen,Winchell;Bauer NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None i,Connie Brockway CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synepsi&of this ordinance has been published in the Huntington Beach 2002 In accordance with the City Charter of said City City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk Connie Brockway, City Clerk of the City Council of the City Deputy City Clerk of Huntington Beach, California 1