Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Campaign Operations topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bill to allow multiple campaign depositories wins support for friendly amendments and technical review

Virginia House committee (specific committee name not stated in transcript) · January 28, 2026
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

HB 1185 would let campaigns list more than one financial institution as a depository to maintain FDIC coverage and access modern banking tools. The Department of Elections said system changes would be needed; delegates proposed capping depositories at two and delaying enactment to allow technical work.

Delegate O'Quinn introduced House Bill 1185 to permit campaign committees to list more than one financial institution as a campaign depository. He said the change would let candidates keep local banking relationships while ensuring FDIC coverage and access to features such as online banking, payroll, or accounts-payable systems. "This would give you flexibility," O'Quinn told the committee, adding that required reconciliation and reporting would remain the same.

The commissioner of elections (unnamed in the transcript) said the current system would need technical adjustments to allow additional depositories but that reconciling monthly bank statements from every listed depository should make campaign finance reviews workable. Delegates raised auditability concerns — for example, whether multiple accounts could make tracking funds harder — and suggested solutions.

Delegate Singh proposed two friendly amendments: limit the number of depositories to two and add a delayed enactment to allow the Department of Elections time for technical changes. O'Quinn said he was open to capping the number at two and to a delayed effective date; counsel confirmed a delayed enactment or administrative workaround could be possible. The committee did not take a final vote on HB 1185 at this meeting and asked council to draft the friendly amendments for consideration at a later date.