Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rulemaking Pac Accounts topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ethics commission tables proposed rule on PAC bank accounts and registration timing

State Ethics Commission (Government Transparency & Campaign Finance Commission) · September 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After extended debate over statutory text and practical implementation, the State Ethics Commission voted to table a proposed rule that would have required political action committees to maintain segregated bank accounts at inception while leaving registration thresholds tied to the $25,000 statutory test.

The State Ethics Commission on Sept. 17 tabled a proposed rule that would clarify when political action committees must open a separate bank account and how that requirement interacts with a new statutory provision (subsection e0.1).

Staff described the rule as intended to make clear “a political action committee is always required to maintain an isolated bank account, or a separate segregated account in the name of the political action committee from the time of its inception until its termination,” while noting the statute still ties registration and reporting to a $25,000 contributions/expenditures threshold. Commissioners raised legal and practical questions: whether existing exceptions that apply to subsection e also apply to the newly added e0.1, whether the commission has authority to extend those exceptions by rule, and how a committee could open a bank account before receiving any funds (banks often require an initial deposit).

Several commissioners said the statute’s new ordering made the exceptions in subsections e(1)–e(3) apply only to e (the older paragraph) and not automatically to e0.1, and recommended narrowing any rule to only address the timing of opening a segregated account (not registration thresholds). After discussion, Commissioner (Speaker 5) moved to table the proposal; the motion was seconded and adopted by voice vote.

Chair noted the discussion was intended as constructive feedback to staff and not a rebuke; she said the office could revisit the rule with revised language or leave the statutory text to speak for itself.

The commission tabled the rule for further work and did not adopt new regulatory language at the meeting.