The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will consider raising the limit of what individuals can contribute to county campaigns, from $1,675 per election cycle, to $2,500.
If approved, the new limit would apply to races for county supervisor, assessor, auditor-controller, county clerk-recorder, district attorney, sheriff-coroner, and treasurer-tax collector.
The Contra Costa County Election Campaign Ordinance was first adopted in 1984. The $1,675 limit for individual campaign contributions to non-supervisorial county office candidates was last revised in 2004.
The limit for individual campaign contributions to supervisorial candidates was last revised in 2005.
The proposed new limit of $2,500 could be extended to $5,000 in two circumstances: where the total cumulative expenditures of the committee or committees making independent expenditures opposing the candidate or supporting the candidate’s opponent equal $75,000 or more; or when the candidate faces a self-funded opponent, as defined by county ordinance.
According to a staff report for Tuesday’s meeting, all other provisions of the election campaign ordinance would remain unchanged.
The report also explains why the raise is being proposed for the first time in 16 years.
“The cost of election campaigns has significantly increased due to the rising cost of living and the increased cost for outreach resulting from the increased county population,” the report says. “Another related factor in rising campaign costs is the larger role of independent expenditure committees for or against candidates in campaigns at the local level. Independent expenditure committees can raise large sums of money that can have an impact on the outcome of an election. Raising the individual campaign contribution limits for county elected offices will help candidates offset the potential impacts of the changes that have raised the costs of local campaigns.”
A state law that took effect on Jan. 1, 2021, applies campaign contribution limits of $4,900 per election (adjusted every odd year) to city and county races in jurisdictions that don’t already have their own laws. Contra Costa’s ordinance supersedes it.
If adopted, the new limits would go into effect March 2.
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors meets virtually at 9 a.m. today. The meeting can be viewed at www.contracosta.ca.gov or on Zoom, at https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/87344719204.
18 comments
As always, anything considered is approved.
This is just more money to line their already plush pockets.
Karen needs a nice big retirement bonus.
The Teachers Union needs a place to park their cash.
JRocks
More like Seeno needs a place to park more cash.
“The cost of election campaigns has significantly increased due to the rising cost of living and the increased cost for outreach resulting from the increased county population,” . There it is … mass immigration into our state bankrupting everything causing inflation but apparently I’m racist if I don’t want more people here. Btw boohoo get a side job/alternative income like the rest of us would if we needed more money. These ppl are so corrupt and evil wake up residents they are fleecing what little is left and filling their pockets and using this covid bs to destroy anyone who gets in their way of their egalitarian techno transcendence
When are you politicians going to stop lining your pockets.Start taking care of the citizens of your community.You are self centered egotistical bullies.
Every candidate should answer a list of questions drawn up by a bipartisan committee on various topics. That would give voters a better chance to know what they are voting for. Right now it is who has the most money or vocal supporters. Then they come up with stupid ideas like banning natural gas.
Ricardoh
Partially true on the gas. But you can also thank PG&E for that as well. Their lack of line maintenance has lead to the delivery of gas in their reign of terror being dangerous. You only have to go as far as the Oregon or Nevada boarders to see safe gas delivery. Heck gas delivery is safer in SoCal than it is in PG&E’s reign of terror.
They should be lowering the limit, not raising it. Also put a cap on the total amount that can be raised and wasted by candidates to level the playing field. Politicians are inherently self-serving in spite of the lies they spew…
They want more money, we want better representation.
They want mandates, we want freedom.
They want masks, we want smiles.
Let the BOS know you are watching them, and TIRED of their bad ideas- https://restorecontracosta.com/email-the-board/
While the board is considering revised campaign rules… How about considering TERM LIMITS for all local/municipal elections. Seriously, isn’t everyone tired of the arrogance of career politicians?!?!
Lower the limit, to limit the amount of fliers that end up in my mailbox. It’s the environmentally correct thing to do.
I suggest a bipartisan committee draw up a list of written questions each candidate has to answer. We then may have a chance to know what we are voting for. They don’t need more money.
You voted for those imbeciles on the Board if Supervisors, so you only have yourselves to blame.
OK fine, but now they have to disclose the soft dollars they receive and their source.
Shouldn’t we be voting on this not the politicians? What could go wrong?? Kind of like voting yourself a pay raise.
This is an ethical mess of whether limits are acceptable and what those should be. Skipping by that mess, if limits should exist then only those who have county resident status should be allowed to contribute so we don’t have the George Soro types involved in our lives. Also, I thought it very unethical that all that Silicon Valley money flows to congressional East Coast races to tilt the majorities in congress. That is not where they live so they are undemocratically buying influence.
Why in the world do they have the power to change this? Why isn’t this put up for a vote to the people? Asking a politician if they want to be able to receive more money is like asking a small child if they want more candy.
We already know the Supervisors get to assign their own salary. I am not surprised that they are willing to legislate themselves more money in other ways, too. The Mafia are amateurs. The public employee unions wash the sups’ back, and they return the favor. The police are 100% on board, everybody gets paid and it’s all perfectly legal.
Comments are closed.