Supervisors finished what they started earlier this month and
voted Tuesday to scrap the county’s campaign finance reform
ordinance, but some on the board left open the possibility of
creating a new ordinance.
Hollister – Supervisors finished what they started earlier this month and voted Tuesday to scrap the county’s campaign finance reform ordinance, but some on the board left open the possibility of creating a new ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to follow through with repealing the ordinance. Supervisor Pat Loe cast the sole dissenting vote. Tuesday’s action came after a majority of the board voted on Nov. 8 to draft an ordinance striking campaign finance reform requirements from the San Benito County code. At that time, Loe also cast a dissenting vote, and Supervisor Don Marcus was not in attendance. Tuesday’s vote adopted the ordinance repealing campaign finance requirements.
Attorneys and citizens have been calling the county recently seeking clarification of the ordinance – a sign that it could be challenged next year during the county election, County Counsel Claude Biddle said Nov. 8. He added that his office would be hard-pressed to defend the ordinance because it is ambiguous.
“There’s all kinds of loopholes and land mines,” he said at that time. “I see nothing but trouble coming from this.”
On Tuesday, Deputy County Counsel Terra Chaffee reiterated Biddle’s concerns, saying that attorneys for potential candidates in next year’s county election have already threatened to challenge the ordinance if the county tries to enforce it.
Passed by a previous board in 2004, the county’s finance reform ordinance put a $10,000 spending cap for county district election campaigns and a $35,000 cap on campaigns for countywide elections.
At the time it was adopted, board members hoped the ordinance would level the playing field for new candidates and reduce the possibility of fraud in county elections. In addition to establishing spending caps, the ordinance limited campaign donations to a total of $100 per individual or group. It also mandated that the names of people and groups that make donations of $50 or more be posted on the county Web site. In 2004, opponents of the ordinance were concerned that it would complicate county elections and curtail the degree to which people can participate in the political process.
Loe, who supported the ordinance as a member of the previous board, asked Chaffee why the county counsel’s office couldn’t just rewrite the ordinance and bring it to the board for adoption.
“It would basically have to be completely rewritten almost line for line,” Chaffee said. While the ordinance was being rewritten, she said, it would remain in force as it is during the upcoming election cycle.
County Attorney Shirley Murphy, who sat in for Biddle during Tuesday’s meeting, agreed with her colleague, saying there was not enough time to rewrite the ordinance before candidates start registering next month that they intend to run in the 2006 election.
“Timing is a problem,” she said. “That’s one of the main reasons why our office is recommending a repeal rather than an amendment.”
District Attorney John Sarsfield told the board that he thought that even he had trouble interpreting the campaign finance ordinance, but he also recommended that a simpler version be drafted rather than scraping it altogether.
“The current ordinance is problematic,” he said.
While the board finally voted to repeal the ordinance so it would not have a negative effect on the 2006 election, Supervisor Don Marcus and Botelho did say they were open to the possibility of crafting a new ordinance for subsequent elections.
The board also directed the county administration to work with the elections department to get the software and equipment needed to post campaign donation information on the county’s Web site.
