EXHIBIT N
000291
CITY OF RIVERSIDE Riverside
RUEAKIDE
bandie COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM
People Serving
People 104X
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: February 12, 2004
ITEM NO: 4
SUBJECT: ELECTIONS
BACKGROUND:
Section Pr one Charter provides that Councilmembers shall be elected from their respective Wards and that the Mayor shall be elected at large for four-year terms. Further if no candidate teing or saging of successes candidatesf election shall be held. The section further defines the requested to perform certain services for the City. Terms are staggered with the Mayor and Wards 2, 4, and 6 appearing on the same ballot followed two years later with Wards 1, 3, 5, and 7 on the ballot. All other elections are called "special" elections. Run-off elections are held the second week of January, if required.
Section 502 offers flexibility to the City Council in determining the voting system to be used.
Municipal elections that are consolidated with the County must by law and as a matter of practicality use the same voting system being employed Countywide on that same day. The Elections Code precludes two systems being used on the same day. For instance, the City could not conduct a mail-in ballot election simultaneously with a polling place election being conducted by the County eficivenes. This setion to as witen, offers the potentat of a cily Councet ordinance to permit instant runoff voting.
Section 503 ensures the electorate the opportunities provided under the Elections Code for voters during the 30 days foloving adoption), and recal or focal elected oricalis: refered to the Currently, 20 qualified electors of the City nominate the Mayor at large. Councilmembers are the voters at any realia or specia municipal elective her by direction of the hity laund or reg petition of registered voters.
4-1 000292
All regular municipal elections are consolidated with the County and are conducted as polling place elections using touch screen voting equipment. For special stand-alone elections, which include runoff elections, the City Council has the option of directing the elections to be conducted as polling place or by mail-in ballot. Any change in a voting system for the regular municipal election would require a change in the regular municipal election day or software modification and State certification of the new voting system. Instant run-off voting would require both software modification for touch screen equipment as well as State certification of the system.
In recent past, runoff elections have been conducted by mail-in ballot. Should instant runoff voting be implemented, runoff elections would be moot as the elections results would be finalized at the regular municipal election in November.
Mail-In Ballot vs, Polling Place Elections
Those that favor mail-in ballot elections cite voter convenience, cost savings, security from fraud as every voter's signatures is checked against the registration files, increased voter turnout, and it's acknowledgement of the growing popularity of absentee voting.
Others who support the tradition of "going to the polls" on election day and fear fraud potential as ballots could be marked by other than the voter favor polling place elections using electronic voting equipment. Ballots for run-off elections become part of the holiday mail rush and increased voter tumout is not always realized. Mailed ballots are at times not counted for reasons which include missing signatures, two ballots in one envelope, address does not match the file, signature does Riverside has experienced mixed results with respect to voter tumout for mail-in ballot elections.
Wards that traditionally have lower voter turnout see a dramatic increase with mail-in ballot elections. However, those with traditionally high voter turnout see little difference between mail-in Community Proposals
Two proposals that have been presented to the Charter Review Committee are instant runoff voting and nomination of Councilmembers by Ward with election at large. The committee will receive a presentation from the League of Women Voters at this meeting providing further information on instant runoff voting wherein voters indicate a preference for first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on. In the event no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast as first choice, the candidate with the least number of votes is dropped from consideration and those votes are recounted using the voter's second choice, and so on until one candidate receives the required FISCAL IMPACT:
Cost for the November 4, 2003, regular municipal election for Wards 1, 3, 5, and 7 were $181,809 compared to the November 2001 election for the Mayor and Wards 2, 4, and 6 which was billed at Balot elections generaly represent a savings of 1/3 over poting lace lections 50.000. Mai-in 4-2
000293
ALTERNATIVES:
Tither consideratay request additional information on these or other election-related topics for RECOMMENDATION:
That the Committee receive the information provided and continue its deliberation.
Prepared by:
castical
COLLÉEN y. NICOL
City Clerk
Attachments:
Charter Sections
Voter Tumout Chart
Cnicollelectionssr.crc021204
4-3
000294
Sec. 400 Enumerated; number, term and manner of clectio Page TOT
CITY CHARTER
Sec.400 Enumerated; number, term and manner of election; wards.
A. The elective officers of the City shall consist of'a City Council of seven members, elected from wards, and a Mayor elected from the City at large, at the times and in the manner provided in this Charter, who shall serve for a term of four years and until their respective successors qualify. The terms of all officials, so elected, shall be deemed to have commenced on the fifth Tuesday following the general municipal election.
B. The members of the City Council shall be elected by wards by the registered voters of the respective wards only. One member of the City Council shall be elected by each ward, and only the repistered voters of each ward shall vote for the member of the City Council to be elected by that ward. In those wards where there are more s cast for the ice shalt be declare than two candidates, only a candidate receiving a majority of the total votes cast for the office shall be declared elected.
C. If in an election for a member of the City Council for any ward, or for the office of Mayor, no candidate receives a majority of the total votes cast for the office, the City Council shall immediately upon the determination of that fact, call a special election to be held on the tenth Tuesday following the general municipal election. The two candidates receiving the highest number of votes for the office in the general municipal election shall be declared the candidates for the spocial election.
Or or can as, Bed a no even ale han the et Tuesday ko wing one thereal nd ticipal elon of confiletion. elected at any other election shall take office on the second Tuesday following completion of the canvass, but in no event later than the fifth Tuesday following the election.
E. The qualifications of candidates and electors and the procodure governing general municipal clections shall aily do any ripecial electice or luch preit electin section and the notice of election shall be published as least 4-4
000295
Sec.500 General municipal elections. Page ToT
CITY CHARTER
Sec.500 General municipal elections.
Counal may prea ele hal ber ne in te cir o e ae ue ay fotoei oe tore r day rg November of each odd numbered year.
4-5
000296
Sec. 501 Special municipal elections. Page ToT
CITY CHARTER
Sec.501 Special municipal elections.
All other municipal elections that may be held by authority of this Charter, or of any law, shall be known as special municipal elections.
4-6
000297
Soc. 502 Compliance with State law. Page 1 ofT
CITY CHARTER
Sec. 502 Compliance with State law.
Unless otherwise provided by ordinance hereafter enacted, all elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of Califomia, as the same now exist or hereafter may be amended, for the holding of elections in cities so far as the same are not in conflict with the 4-7
000298
Sec. 503 Initiative, referendum and recall Page 1 ofT
CITY CHARTER
Sec. 503 Initiative, referendum and recall.
There are hereby reserved to the electors of the City the powers of the initiative and referendum and of the recall of municipal elective officers. The provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California, as the same now exist or hereafter may be amended, governing the initiative and referendum and the recall of municipal officers, shall apply to the use thereof in the City so far as such provisions of the Elections Code are not in conflict with the provisions of this Charter. 4-8
000299
ELECTIONS
4-9 Charter Review
Committee
Community Forum
February 12, 2004
000300
Charter Provisions
• Section 400
- Councilmembers shall be elected from Wards
- Mayor shall be elected from City at large
- Four-year terms
- If no candidate receives majority (50% plus 1), then
runoff between two highest candidates
- Date of runoff election
- Seating of successful candidates
000301
Charter Provisions
• Section 500
- General Municipal Elections shall be held in
November of odd-numbered years
• Section 501
- All other elections shall be "special municipal
elections"
000302
Charter Provisions
• Section 502
Unless otherwise provided by ordinance
hereafter enacted, all elections shall be held in
accordance with the provisions of the Elections
Code of the State of California, as the same now
exist or hereafter may be amended, for the holding
of elections in cities so far as the same are not in
conflict with the Charter.
000303
Charter Provisions
• Section 503
Electors are reserved the powers of:
- Initiative
- Referendum
- Recall
000304
Election Dates
• November of odd-numbered years
- Wards 2, 4, 6 and Mayor
- Wards 1, 3, 5, and 7
• Run-off elections
- January of even-numbered years
000305
Nominations
• Councilmembers:
- 20 signatures of qualified electors from the Ward
• Mayor:
- 20 signatures from qualified electors of the City
000306
Measures
• Regular municipal election
• Special municipal election
• Placed on ballot by:
- City Council
- Citizen petition
000307
Voting Systems - Current Practice
• Regular Municipal Election
- Consolidated with County-wide election
- Polling place - touch screen equipment
• Special Stand-Alone Elections
- Run off, measures
- Mail Ballot
- Polling Place
000308
Voting Systems - Options
• Regular Municipal Elections (Mayor and
Councilmembers)
- Consolidated ballot with County-polling place
- Any change in voting system would require regular
election day move and/or software modification
• Special Municipal Elections (Runoff)
- Instant Runoff Voting
- Mail in Ballot vs Polling Place
000309
Voting Systems - Options
• Special Municipal Elections (Measures)
- Mail-in ballot
- Polling Place
000310
Costs - Regular Municipal
Elections
• November 4, 2003, Regular municipal election
- Wards 1, 3, 5, 7
- $181,809
• November 2001, Regular municipal election
- Mayor and Wards 2, 4, and 6
- $250,636
000311
Costs - Special Municipal Elections
• January 13, 2004, run-off (Wards 1, 3, and 7)
• Mail-in ballot election
• Estimate: $50,000
000312
Mail-In Ballot Elections
• Those that favor mail-in ballot:
- Convenient
- Less expensive
- Less fraud - signatures of all voters checked
- Increased voter turnout
- Acknowledges popularity of absentee voting
000313
Mail-In Ballot Elections
• Those that favor polling place elections:
- Tradition of "going to the polls"
- Greater fraud potential with mail-in ballots
- Run-off ballots lost in holiday mail
- Do not always see increased voter turnout
- Every vote counts at the polls - no disqualified
ballots for missing signature, address does not
match, two ballots in one envelope, etc.
000314
Voter Turnout-Mail Ballot vs Polls
• Mixed results
• Low voter turnout Wards - Increase with mail-
in ballot
• High voter turnout Wards - Virtually no
difference with mail-in ballot
000315
Community Proposals
• Instant Runoff Voting
- Voting system qualification
- Costs unknown
• Nomination of Councilmembers by Ward with
election at large
000316
Office of the City Clerk
Colleen J. Nicol, MMC
City Clerk
City of Riverside
(909) 826-5557
[email protected]
000317
VOTER TURNOUT
1990 TO 2004
TYPE OF ELECTION VOTER TURNOUT
20.0% - Mayor
1-9-1990 Mayor, Wards 4 and 6 - Runoffs 40.0% - Ward 4
17.9% - Ward 6
6-5-1990 Ward 7 - Special Election 30.9%
7-24-1990 Ward 7 - Runoff 14.1%
21.1% - Ward 1
23.7% - Ward 3
11-5-1991 Wards 1, 3, 5, 7
21.1% - Ward 5
19.8% - Ward 7
1-141992 Ward 3 - Runoff 14.1%
34.4% - Mayor/Charter
Review Committee
11-2-1993 Mayor; Wards 2, 4, 6; Charter Review 31.6% - Ward 2 Committee (Measure J)
45.0% - Ward 4
26.8% - Ward 6
22.3% - Mayor
1-11-1994 Mayor, Ward 2 - Runoffs
19% - Ward 2
6-7-1994 Ward 1 Vacancy 37.1%
Public Safety Measure
11-8-1994 (consolidated with State-wide 60.2%
election)
4-27
000318
ELECTION DATE TYPE OF ELECTION VOTER TURNOUT
16.9% - Charter
15.9% - Ward 1
11-7-1995 Wards 1, 3, 5, 7. Charter Amendment 16.2% - Ward 3
20.9% - Ward 5
21.5% - Ward 7
1-9-1996 Ward 7 - Runoff (mail-in ballot) 32.9%
Measure EE-Street Light
6-17-1997 Assessment District 31.2%
(mail-in ballot)
25.4% - Mayor
27.6% - Ward 2
11-4-1997 Mayor; Wards, 2, 4, 6
36.1% - Ward 4
17.3% - Ward 6
36.9% - Ward 4
1-13-1998 Wards 4, 6 - Runoff (mail-in ballot)
18.6% - Ward 6
20.6% - Ward 1
22.5% - Ward 3
11-2-1999 Wards 1, 3, 5, and 7
21.2% - Ward 5
18.0% - Ward 7
33.0% - Ward 5
1-11-2000 Wards 5, 7- Runoff (mail-in ballot)
33.1% - Ward 7
4-28
000319
ELECTION DATE TYPE OF ELECTION VOTER TURNOUT
27.09% - Mayor
11-6-2001 26.71% - Ward 2
Mayor, Wards 2, 4, 6
38.05% - Ward 4
17.39% - Ward 6
45.5% - Ward 4
1-15-2002 Wards 4, 6 - Runoff (mail-in ballot)
23.9% - Ward 6
Library Bond Measure C
3-5-2002 (consolidated with State-wide 29.78%
election)
Charter Amendments - Measures Q,
11-5-2003 R, and S (consolidated with State-
wide election) 43.47%
21.28% - Measure G
25.74% - Ward 1
11-14-2003 Wards 1, 3, 5, 7, Measure G
20.01% - Ward 5
20.30% - Ward 7_
36.8% - Ward 1
1-15-2004 Wards 1, 5, 7 - Runoff (mail-in Ballot)
36.6% - Ward 3
32.8% - Ward 7
g: lciklelection\turnout
4-29
000320
Rut Cac 2-20-07
How Instant Runoff Voting Works The value of majority winners.
Runoffs seek to assure that in single-seat elec
Instant runoff voting (IRV) is a method of vot- tions the winning candidate has the support of the ing that determines a majority winner in a single Faster... majority of voters, rather than a mere plurality. In
election, no matter how many candidates are a majority system, candidates must gain the sup- running. It combines a regular election and a port of more than 50% of voters, while a plurality Cheaper runoff election between the top candidates into system can reward extreme candidates who one election.
couldn't gain 50% support, but might win the most fatter..
Each voter has the option of ranking candidates votes in a fractured field. Runoffs indeed can be valuable in determining the community consen- lections
in order of choice (1, 2, 3, etc.). They select
their favorite candidate as their first choice, sus and protecting voters from unrepresentative and their runoff choices as their subsequent leaders. But requiring two elections can undermine choices, in case their favorite candidate the majority principle due to lower voter turnout doesn't make the runoff.
Why waste money on two elections? ant
15T 2ND | 3RD By using instant runoff voting, the goal of choice chaice choice
majonty winners can be achieved in just one elec-
Paul T. Carston O tion. By eliminating an unnecessary trip to the Runoff
Carolyn P. Nash polls, IRV saves significant tax dollars, reduces candidates' need to raise money and maximizes
Thomas G. Webb voter turnout. If desired, it is even possible to fold primary elections into the general election.
oting
The Center for Voting and Democracy is a non-
If no candidate is the first choice of at least
half of the voters, a runoff count is conducted. partisan, non-profit educational organization The counting of ballots simulates a series of that studies the American electoral process and runoff elections, eliminating the candidates the impact of proposed reforms on voter partici- from the bottom who have the least support. pation, representation and governance. The Cen- Majority
In each round, every voter's ballot counts as ter is supported by individuals and foundations a single vote for his or her top-ranked candi- including the Ford Foundation, the Joyce Foun- Rule
date who is still in the running, as indicated dation and the Open Society Institute. Former on that voter's ballot. Candidates with the Congressman John B. Anderson is its president. least support are eliminated until there are with
just two remaining. The finalist with the high- The Center for Voting & Democracy est number of votes is elected by a majority. a sel
6930 Carroll Ave., Suite 610
The count can be simplified by immediately Takoma Park, MD 20912 runof 301-270-4616
reducing the field to two candidates after the
initial ballot count and determining a winner [email protected] in the second round of counting. www.fairvote.org • C32012 wW 000321
Why not settle for plurality winners? appeal. IRV can avoid some of the extreme polarization Typical two- Instant runoff that can occur in a traditional runoff between candidates election runoff When three or more candidates are in a race, the who characterize their opponent as dishonorable. voting majority of voters may split such that the plurality win. ЗТЕР #1 ner (the one with the most votes) is actually the candi. date a majority of voters consider to be the worst choice Voters go to the polls anc Voters go to the polls an There Is no need to suffer the "spoiler" problem in multi mark their favorite candi nark theit lavonte candida candidate races, or settle for undemocratic winners. Is instant runoff voting constitutional? on their ballot as their first when a majority voting system such as Instant runoff
Yes. Because every voter gets one vote in each round they can also indicate thei of counting, American courts have consistently ruled runoff choices by ranking that IRV complies with the one-person, one-vote man- preference - 1, 2, 3. date of the U.S. Supreme Court Likewise, there are no
Why Is IRV better than two-election runoffs? federal laws that would prevent any state from adopt- ing instant runoff voting for electing their congressional If no candidate receives a If no candidate receives a It saves both taxpayars and candidates money, and delegation or presidential electors. IRV is recommended eliminates hassles for both voters and election admin- by Robert's Rules of Order (called "preferential voting"). istrators by having one election instead of two. Tradi. and is used by the American Political Science Associa- tional runoffs also typically result in significantly fewer lion (political science professors) for electing their own voters participating in one of the elections. A drop in turnout of over 50% is not uncommon. IRV maximizes raising and campaigning. voter participation. The countries with the highest voter Now ballots must be quickly turnout in the world use instant runoff voting. printed. Poling stations Where has IRV been adopted? must be set up again.
IRV is used for government elections in several resulting in lower tumout.
Is IRV simple for voters to use? English-speaking countries, such as: Australia, Ireland in the U.S. instant runoff voting has been
Millions of voters have used this system for adopted in places such as: Louisiana (for overseas If your favorite candidate If your favorite candidate decades without problems. Mock elections in a large absentee ballots), the Utah Republican Party (for U.S. number of schools and senior citizen centers prove Congressional nominations at conventions), and the city that people have no difficulty with rank-order voting, and of San Francisco for its most important offices. ballot for your favorite or your lavorite candidate most actually prefer it. An initial voter education cam- paign is recommended, but all evidence suggests that
voter error will not increase and may even decrease. you mark your bailot for your counts for your next choice Are current voting machines able to handle IRV?
This depends on the voting machine. Older punch-
What Impact would IRV have on campaigns? card and lever-style machines are incompatible. The candidate with the Tha can de vis those marindia vale h Ranked-choice elections have been administered on majority of the votes wins. ptical scan, and touchscreen equipment, as well a voting in the second election) vith hand-counted paper ballols. New Federal Election
SUMMARY
* wastes lax money
* inconvenient for voters more conient for ters
ates with both strong core support and also broa * lower voter turnout * higher voter tumout 000322
fini Crc.
#-6
Do you feel your vote cant compete with big campaign
contributions from special interests?
There's a solution called "Clean Money, Clean Elections". With your help, we'll bring it to California.
Read this page to learn the basics about:
• The Problem: Too often politicians serve the needs of big money campaign contributors, Instead of the voters. Good candidates can't run with out hey honey option: Clean Money replaces prate campaign contributions with pubile funding so voters can once again take control of government.
• How Clean Money Works: Candidates demonstrating broad public support can choose to receive public funding to run competitive campaigns if they forgo private money.
• Results In other States: Clean Money has been working in Advisory Board Member Ed Asner
Arizona and Maine since the 2000 elections. It has led to more qualified and diverse candidates, Increased voter turnout, and Increased attention to voters' issues. See SCA 14 by California • How we're Bringing Clean Money to California: With a State Senators grassroots campaign to educate Californians and get it passed at Vasconcellos, Alpert, Kuehl, Scott and Speir
Which includes a section
The Problem with the Current Systom setting up a Clean
What chance do honest candidates without money have to be elected in California? Not much. Not if they don't want to accept Campaign Fund. money from special interests.
What chance do citizens have of voting for politicians who aren't Watch for California State Assembly woman Loni
seats or tet to coe lites totemuch, beer they donit Hancock's bill which is have money themselves or accept it from private interests, they about to be introduced. It don't really stand a fighting chance in California. will provide public Not in a state in which $130 million was spent by Gov. Gray Davis, financing to all state and Bill Simon and the other contenders in the 2002 governor's race, statewide offices and is and over a million dollars a day was spent in the 2003 recall. Not in modeled after the a state in which lobbylsts looking for budget favors ply legislators California Clean Money with piles of $1,000 checks at hundreds of campaign fund-raisers. draft initiative.
Ours is now a government of big money special interests, not a government of the people. Is it any wonder ordinary citizens feel their voices aren't heard? Is It any wonder our state and country are in such a mess?
Clean Honey is the Solution
How Clean Money Works
000323
"Clean" candidates who quality in Artzona and Maine recelve enough pubile financing to run viable campaigns. If privately funded candidates outspend them, they receive extra public funding to match, up to a limit. They quality by gathering a set number of ndividual $5 contributions and agreeing not to accept any private Results in Other States
It's a resounding success for both voters and candidates.
Voters had more choices at the polls, since more qualified candidates were able to run. More than 60 percent more candidates an for statewide office than in 1998 in Artzona, the last non- presidential election year without Clean Money. The number of minortty candidates tripled.
Legislators are now able to listen to the needs of the voters, rather than the interests that gave them money. Maine became the first state in the nation to pass a form of universal health care. Health care advocates and the public had been pushing for it for years, but had always been stopped by lobbyists. But after 77 percent of Maine's senate was elected "clean" in 2002, that all changed.
Voters have showed their approval in several ways. First, realizing that their vote counts again, they Increased tumout at the polls by more than 10 percent.
Second, they elected "clean" candidates to seven of nine statewide offices in Artzona -- Including Janet Napolitano, the first publidy financed governor ever elected.
Third, Arizona citizens approve of Clean Money more than ever, with an overwhelming 66 percent support in a June 2002 poll.
Leah Landrum, a member of Artzona's House of Representatives, sums It up:
"Now the only interests I'm tied to are my constituents. And they (eel a lot more connected to me. My constituent calls have tripied." How Wo're Bringing Clean Maney to Callfomia
Arizona and Maine show how it can be done. Both states passed Clean Money Intlatives after a lot of research, coalition bullding and grassroots organizing. Public education campaigns spoke directty with citizens in countless forums and explaned plainly how Clean Money would strengthen their voices. These efforts tald the groundwork for their successes.
Now it's Callfonia's turn. Our goal is either pass Clean Money in the legislation or, if required, go directly to the people and pass an initiative.
We, too, deserve a government that's more responsive to Its citizens than to big-money special Interests.
We, too, can restore our lost democracy by electing candidates to puble office who owe their alleglance to voters rather than to private interests.
CALIFORNIA CLEAN MONEY CAMPAIGN http://www.caclean.org/faq/basics.php 000324
...•
1. What Is "Clean Money Campaign Reform?"
Clean Monoy Campaign Roform is a movement to provide qualified candidates who can prove a strong baso of support a sol amount of public funds to run for office. Candidatas who chose to qually agree to limit their spending and reject contributions from private sources.
2. How Would It Work?
In Califomla, our goal is to establish this system for those running for State Assembly, State Senato, and Statewide offices (Gov., Lt Gov., Attomey General, Secretary of State, Treasurer, Controlor, Insurance Commissiones, Superintendent of Public instruction, Board of Equaltzstion). Candidates will quality as Clean Money Candidates," or "participating" candidates, and receive a public grant for the primary and general olections, if they are successfid raising a required number of 55 contributions and signatures of support from residents within the district they hope to reprosent. Candidates have a choice NOT to run as 'Clean Money candidates" as wel, and may run as 'non-participating" candidates who commit to the more traditional approach of raising only privato sources of funds to run for office.
3. Doesn't McCain Feingold Soive most of the Problems with our Campaign Finance Systam? Thare is no queation this CONGRESSIONAL lagislation, which bans "soft money" contributions - unregulated funde spent on behalf of candidates through postical partios - ara a step in the righe direction. However, even the sponsors will tell you it won't solve the crisis in our campaign fnance system. Firat of all, their rules only affect FEDERAL racos - for the U.S. House and Senate - NOT for State of Califomia offices or Legislature. Second, both bils DOUBLE the amount of "hard money," or direct contributions to candidates allowed.
As thoso limits are "per election," a typical candidate for the Hausa of Representativos can still receivo $4,000 from a single individual por election cycle - $2,000 for the primary election, and 52,000 for tha general election. Therefore, the link between spociat interest donors and candidates/elected leadars will not be sovered, and ultimatety access will still be granted to these larger donors and spocial interests.
4. Would "Clean Money" completoly overhaul the currant campalgn finance system in California? Clean Money Campaign Reform is a voluntary systom of public finance, providing not an overhaul - but an alterative - to the moro traditional aystem of campaigns funded by wealthy Individuats and large private interests. Candidates can choose to try and quality for Clean Money pubilc funds, or opt to follow the more traditional system of mising prtvate funds.
5. Will candidates who quality for Clean Money receive sufficient funds to run a competitive campaign? Candidates who quelty for Clean Money funding will get the averago dollar amount spent by those soaking that office in rocent electiona. One grast advantage to the system is that participating candidates will no longer have fundraising expenses. So, Clean Money Campaign Reform will help hold down the oversil cost of campaigns, as the grant given to qualiying candidates can go directly to getting their message to voters.
6. Won't participeting "Clean Money candidates" still got outspont by wealthy, salf-financed candidates who can spend as much as they want?
Under Clean Money Campaign Rofom, participating candidates will gol a dollar-for-dollar match, up to a set Emit, if a non-participating opponent spends more than the basie public financing grant, or if said participating candidate is the targat of an independant expendiure. This wort mean an unimiled amount of maney, but non-particating candidates will have to think twice before deciding they want to surpass tha Clean Money cap, and be responsible for additional public funds gaing to their opponent. Further, racent history shows there is a limit to how much buying of an election the public will tolerate in California.
7. Will candidates be wiling to adopt a Clean Money System? There are strong incentives for candidates to try and quality as "Clean Money candidates." No olected official should have to spond the vast arounts of time raising money that the current systom demands. No challonger looks forward to the task of trying to raise the huge sums of money required to mount a viable campaign against an Incumbert. In fact, these obstacles discourage many good candidates from running for office. Moreover, what candidate or alacted official enjoys the public perception that they are compromised by their acceptance of large contributions from special Interests?
9. Won't the "usual suspects" run for and win political office under Clean Money Campaign Reform? Clean Money Campaign Reform en courages more competitiva alectiona, expocially because it provides funding for Party primaries as vell as general election campaigns. Il empowars candidates with no personal wealth or access to big financial contributors - but who have a proven bese of pubic support - the means to compete for office with the "usual suspects." in their defense, Incumbents and the more famillar faces who decide to run as "Clean Money candidates" will be freed of the pressures to grant access to large donors and special Intorest contributors that they have faced in the pest, which is, after all, one of the major objoctives of Clean Money Campaign Reform.
9. Would i atill be able to giva money to my favorite candidates? 000325
•.•
Under Clean Money Campaign Retorm, poople can alli donate money to candidates they support. During the pro-primary period, they can give not only the small 35 qualitying contribution, but aiso up to $100 during a short "seed money" perlod - the total sum of which is capped -to help their favorite candidate get the word out that they are in fact trying to quality as a participating. Clean Money Reform candidate.
10. Would a Clean Money system undermine the strength of, and need for, polltical parties in the electoral process? Catfomians will stil be allowed to make a financial contribution to a political party under the Clean Monay system. Further, it is our belief that under & Clean Money system, political parties can and should remain active in the nomination and endorsement of candidates; dentifying, researching, and developing the Party's positions on issues; and carrying out non-candidatos specitic voter registration and got-out-the-vote drives and other "party building activitles." Cloan Money roform allows pottical parties to play a vital role within the poltical process as long as they do not serve as a condut through which specla-interest campaign contributors can gain access to elected officials, which our current system under Propostion 34 allows them to do.
11. Does Clean Money Campaign Roform Suppress First Amendment Rights to Froe Speech? If anything, Clean Money Campaign Reform would finally grant poitical speach to thase who never really fool they've had it It is a voluntary system designed to give a voice to those potential candidates who do not hava personal fortunes or Instant access to spectel Interest contributions. Our political and policy dobate, as well as our democracy Itsaif, will only be revitsized and diversified by this system. In addition, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, public financing of election campaigns is constitutional as long as the system is voluntary.
12 Are There Any Examples That This Works?
Versions of Clean Money Reform have passed In Arizona, Maino, Massechuselts, and Vermont In Arizona and Maine, who have now axperienced full elections cycles using Clean Monay Reform, there has been an increase in quatified candidates for offico, more competitivo elections, and a docrease in private money in the political system.
13. WIll Clean Money Campaign Retorm In California enable "fringe candidates" to run for offico with public money? While the public certainly has a right to support whichever candidates it chooses, the qualifying requirements for Clean Money campaign funds are stiff enough to deter fringe candidates with lible or no support from getting public funds. Some form of public financing already exists in 22 states and a number of municipalties. Where these systems are in place, fears about public money spuning fringe candidates have proven to be unfounded.
14. Will the Clean Money system open the ballot up to so many people that the reform will "broak the bank? One of the goals of Clean Money Campaign Reform is to open up the system to as many qualified people as possible, and to hetp astablish a more lovel campalgn playing feld. But, again, the quallying requirements are stiff enough so that anybody considering a run for office will think long and hard about the sertousness of thair offorts before embarking on a campaign to quality for funds. it is therefore unlikely that too many candidates will qualify for Clean Money funds. Moreover, the required number of qualifying contributions can always be raised if experience shows us that it was set too low.
15. Does the public really aupport taxpayer funding of campaigns? Clearty, the public distrusts polticians, and taxpayers are wary of new public expenditure. However, Clean Money Campaign Reform will save Califomla taxpayers money in the form of wisor, wall thought out public policy decisions. The weathy individuals and powerful corporations and special interests who supply most of the money for political campaigns are the reciplents of miltons of dollars in "corporate weifare" subsidies, unnecessary tax breaks, and regulatory exemptions. By eliminating Clean Money candidates' look no further than our energy crisis in Califomia to 800 the kind of access to the State Capital the power companies and special interests were able to purchase. Their contributions gave them the kind of blanket access and influence that allowed them to orchestrate • UNANIMOUS vate of the Legislature to deregulate our electric utilities industry.
16. How will a Clean Money system be funded in Callforda? Revenue for a State Clean Money System will come from a combination of the 55 qualitying contributions collected by participating candidatos, and a dinect appropriation of just 2 cents per day, per year, por eligible voter, by the State Legislature. For the cost of a matinee movia a year, Califomis taxpayer wil take back control of their elections with Clean Money Reform as public policy in this slate.
Leam the Basica •Frequently Askod Questions (FAQ)
from the website of the California Clean Money Campaign http://www.caclean.org/fag/
000326