Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Charter Amendments topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council advances three charter/code ballot questions and backs $500 candidate contribution limit for November

Folsom City Council · May 26, 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

After a lengthy discussion and public comment, council agreed to place three charter/code changes on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot (Section 4.03 — city attorney appointment; Section 4.07 — boards/commissions language; municipal code change to raise campaign contribution limits) and approved a proposed $500 individual contribution limit for voter consideration (4–1).

Following public comment from former councilmember Tom Acetuno and a broad council discussion about campaign finance and city charter language, the Folsom City Council moved to place three proposed measures on the November 3, 2026 municipal ballot. The items are: (1) Section 4.03 — change city attorney appointment from the city manager to the council; (2) Section 4.07 — amend charter language that currently states all boards and commissions are advisory to clarify commission powers and avoid court challenges; and (3) municipal code 2.48.030 — raise campaign contribution limits for individuals and candidate committees.

Council debated probable election costs (staff cited estimates that include per‑voter charges and setup fees), litigation risk around ambiguous Historic District Commission language and how changes could be implemented by ordinance versus charter amendment. After discussion the council: (a) moved to place Section 4.07 on the ballot; (b) later moved to place Section 4.03, Section 4.07 (as written) and a municipal code amendment raising the campaign contribution cap (staff proposed multiple figures). A final motion proposed a $500 limit; the roll call was Rohrbough yes, Aquino no, Kozlowski yes, Leary yes, Raithel yes, approving the $500 proposal 4–1. Council and staff agreed to return with the exact ballot language, legal review and timelines and noted statutory deadlines for ballot measures and argument submittals.