Council debates and amends public campaign financing rules after funding cut; supplemental mechanism added

The Anne Arundel County Council spent much of its Sept. 15 legislative session debating Bill 71-25, the ordinance that sets procedures and safeguards for the county's new public campaign financing system after the council reduced initial funding earlier this year. Council members amended the proposal to require a controller's review of projected fund sufficiency, add an audit after each election cycle and create a formal path for the county executive to request supplemental funding if the controller finds a shortfall.

The public hearing drew repeated criticism from residents and commission members who said earlier reductions to the fund undercut the program's purpose and could discourage candidates. "Adequate funding is essential to the success of this process," Regina Cornelius told the council during public testimony. Spencer Dixon, chair of the county's Public Campaign Financing System Commission, told the council the commission supported some of the bill's changes and urged the council to back the executive's recommended funding during the budget process.

Administration witnesses, led by Ethan Hunt, said officials supported changes that would let the county add money to the fund outside a regular budget if the controller determines that withdrawals will exhaust available money mid-cycle. The council considered a sequence of amendments on Sept. 15: one that would have changed a 3-day payment requirement to "promptly" was rejected (0-7), while other amendments were adopted to base controller calculations on candidates who have indicated to the Maryland State Board of Elections they will seek public financing, to require a controller's notice and a county executive supplemental appropriation request when the fund is projected insufficient, and to require a post-election audit of the system.

Several speakers said the changes did not fix the program's core problem: insufficient up-front funding. "No bill introduced after June's vote will ever be able to be apolitical because the choice to ignore the apolitical math of the commission was in and of itself already a political act," Rebecca Forte said during public testimony. Others, including commission members who spoke, said the amendments give the county practical tools to respond if demand exceeds the fund's balance.

The council did not finish final adoption of the ordinance on Sept. 15; the clerk announced Bill 71-25 "as amended" will be heard again on Oct. 6. Several amendments adopted on Sept. 15 will remain part of the draft that the council reviews next month.

What the council changed and did not change: among the adopted amendments, the controller will determine ahead of an election year whether the fund is sufficient to meet projected maximum contributions for candidates who indicate they will seek public financing; the controller must notify the county executive and council if projections show a shortfall and the county executive must submit a supplemental appropriation request within five days. The council also added a post-election audit requirement. A proposed change to replace a three-business-day controller disbursement requirement with the word "promptly" failed on a 0-7 vote after finance officials said their weekly check cycle and verification work could make a 3-day deadline infeasible.

The council will take up the bill and the amended language again on Oct. 6; no final appropriation or permanent procedural change was enacted on Sept. 15.