Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Campaign Finance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Rules Committee hears ethics commission amendment to campaign finance code, continues ordinance for further consideration

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Rules Committee · September 18, 2008
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

An ordinance to amend section 1.1340.5 of San Francisco's Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code—intended to include negative independent expenditures in trigger calculations—was presented by the Ethics Commission; the committee accepted ethics amendments but continued the item for a later hearing.

The Rules Committee on Sept. 9 took up an ordinance amending section 1.1340.5 of the Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code to lower the threshold that triggers increased individual expenditure ceilings in San Francisco races.

Supervisor Chris Daly introduced the item and said the ordinance seeks to close a loophole that treated negative independent expenditures as a separate entity and therefore did not trigger increased limits for the targeted candidate’s opponents. An Ethics Commission representative told the committee the language before the body had been adopted unanimously by the full commission and added a trigger intended to count independent expenditures opposing a candidate in the formula that raises an eligible candidate’s voluntary expenditure ceiling.

Committee discussion covered mechanics of public financing triggers and numeric examples: supervisors cited current supervisor‑race ceiling figures (a $140,000 voluntary cap) and noted the mayoral ceiling ($1,300,000), explaining how multiple actors could cumulatively affect access to public financing. A committee member also said the Ethics Commission has staffing constraints as the new program adds monitoring responsibilities.

After brief public comment (none for this special calendar item), the committee moved to continue the ordinance to a subsequent meeting to allow more time for consideration and to accommodate Ethics Commission input; the matter will return to Rules Committee after that continuance.