The City of Long Beach, California voted to establish a city ethics commission.

Measure CCC creates an independent ethics commission charged with administering and implementing rules concerning campaign financing, lobbying, conflicts of interest and governmental ethics.

The commission will also develop an educational program for candidates and lobbyists with the city.

The city’s agreement with the Fair Political Practices Commission to assist in the enforcement of local ethics laws remains in place.

A majority of city voters endorsed Measure 2E, banning corporations and labor organizations from donating directly to political campaigns for city offices and lowering the cap on donations for mayor, City Council, and other government posts.

Beginning January 1, 2020, mayoral candidates will be prohibited from accepting more than $1,000 per donor, as opposed to $3,000.

Individual donations for at-large council members will drop from $2,000 to $700, and donations to district candidates will be capped at $400 instead of $1,000.

North Carolina voters defeated a constitutional amendment to establish an eight-member Bipartisan Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement.

In defeating the amendment, voters validated a previous North Carolina Supreme Court ruling that struck down a 2017 law establishing the eight-member board because it reduced the governor’s executive authority and failed to provide representation for unaffiliated voters.

Currently, the governor appoints eight of nine members of the board from nominees provided by the two largest political parties.

The governor appoints the ninth member from nominations provided by the other eight members.

North Dakota Voters passed a constitutional measure to establish an ethics commission.

Initiated Constitutional Measure 1 addresses the transparency of funding sources, lobbyists, conflicts of interests, and the establishment of an ethics commission.

The measure further restricts lobbyists ability to give gifts and campaign contributions.

The legislative assembly is directed to pass laws that provide electronically accessible public disclosure of funding that attempts to influence state-wide elections and ballot measures.

Nearly 62 percent of Missourians voted in favor of Amendment 1, placing tighter restrictions on lobbying and campaign contributions.

Amendment 1 will prohibit former state legislators and Missouri General Assembly members from becoming paid lobbyists for a period of two years instead of six months, set a $5 limit on meals and other lobbyist gifts to legislators, and open legislators’ emails to public records requests.

Political candidates and their campaign committees also face more strict contribution limits: $2,500 for a state senator and $2,000 for a state representative.

The measure will become state law once the election results are certified later this year.

In Tuesday’s election, Arizona passed Proposition 306, placing limits on the state’s Clean Elections Commission’s rulemaking ability among other things.

The voter created Arizona Clean Elections Commission was established in 1998 and runs a public-financing system for candidates and enforces financial-reporting rules for campaigns and groups that spend money in elections.

Proposition 306 requires the Commission’s rules to be approved by the Governor’s Regulatory Review Council comprised of political appointees. Opponents argued it was a way to limit the Commission’s ability to police dark money spending in Arizona.

The measure also prohibits candidates who receive public financing from paying money to political parties or private tax-exempt groups that try to influence elections.

Proposition 306 passed with 56 percent of the vote.

South Dakota voters did not pass a constitutional amendment to create a campaign finance and government accountability board but passed a measure to ban out of state donations on ballot questions.

Amendment W would have had the power to regulate campaign finance and lobbying laws and create a government accountability board. The measure failed by a margin of 45 percent in favor with 55 percent against.

Initiated Measure 24 bans out of state campaign donations for ballot question committees by nonresidents, out of state political committees and other groups not filed with the Secretary of State. The measure passed by a margin of 56 percent in favor and 44 percent against.

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley predicts that passage of Initiated Measure 24 may be challenged as an unconstitutional violation of free speech and ultimately a financial burden to tax payers.

Colorado voters defeated Amendment 75, keeping campaign spending limits in place.

Amendment 75 would have allowed candidates to accept five times the level of individual contributions to their campaign as is normally allowed ($1,150 for statewide offices and $400 for local races) if another candidate submitted $1 million or more to his or her own campaign or to a third-party committee.

Only about 33 percent of voters supported the measure. The amendment needed 55 percent of votes to pass.

On Election Day, Massachusetts voters passed Question 2, paving the way for campaign finance reform.

The ballot measure establishes a citizen commission tasked with producing a report on the state of political spending in the Massachusetts and promoting an amendment to the United States Constitution. The commission would also report on whether the state can legally limit corporate contributions.

Proponents of the ballot question hope it will help in overturning the 2010 decision in Citizens United, while those against it argued the measure was a protest vote and created a new governmental body solely for symbolic gesture.

The measure passed 71.3 percent to 28.69 percent, with 81.8 percent of precincts reporting.

Campaign Finance

Federal: “House Dem Candidates Snag Free Office Rent” by Scott Bland for Politico

Canada: “Alberta Tables Bill Proposing Changes to Municipal Elections” by Charles Lefebvre for Chat News Today

Alaska: “As Alaska’s Elections Come Down to Wire, Ads Test Limits of Campaign Finance Laws” by Zachariah Hughes for Alaska Public Media

Elections

National: “Forget the Russians. On This Election Day, It’s Americans Peddling Disinformation and Hate Speech.” by Craig Timnberg and Tony Romm for Washington Post

Florida: “Before Going to Prison, Former Opa-locka Commissioner Worked on Political Campaigns” by Jay Weaver and Maya Kaufman for Miami Herald

Ethics

Federal: “Newly Released Emails Suggest Zinke Contradicted Ethics Pledge” by Juliet Eilperin (Washington Post) for MSN

Federal: “China Greenlights Large Batch of Ivanka Trump Trademark Applications” by Gary Shih for Washington Post

Lobbying

National: “Industries Turn Freedom of Information Requests on Their Critics” by Elizabeth Williamson for WRAL

Campaign Finance

Federal: “Anyone Can Make a Super PAC – Even Prisoners and Kids Who Can’t Vote” by Kaitlin Washburn for Center for Responsive Politics

Elections

Federal: “In Email to Trump’s Campaign Strategist, Roger Stone Implied He Knew of WikiLeaks’s Plans” by Sharon LaFraniere, Michael Schmidt, Maggie Haberman, and Danny Hakim (New York Times) for MSN

Ethics

Connecticut: “Judge Rules UConn Did Not Violate Ethics Law in Hiring Football Coach Randy Edsall’s Son” by Dave Altimeri for Hartford Courant

Nebraska: “UNL Professor Files Ethics Complaint, Alleging Fortenberry’s Chief of Staff Threatened Him Over Facebook Post” by Joseph Morton for Omaha World-Herald

Lobbying

Canada: “Senators Are Being Lobbied More Than Ever – And Some Are Feeling Overwhelmed” by John Paul Tasker for CBC

New York: “Lobbyist Arrested, Accused of Bribing State Legislator” by Gary Craig for Rochester Democrat and Chronicle

The city of Long Beach, California has a measure to amend the city’s charter on Tuesday’s ballot.

Measure CCC seeks to create an independent ethics commission charged with administering and implementing rules concerning campaign finance, lobbying, conflicts of interest and governmental ethics.

Critics of the measure argue that the mayor and auditor’s appointment privilege signifies that the commission would not be sufficiently independent.

Got a minute?! (and a 1/2) Here are four stories from this week in campaign finance and advocacy that you don’t want to miss.

Earlier this year, the New Hampshire Attorney General Gordon MacDonald issued a letter to the Office of Secretary of State advising on his interpretation of some aspects of the state’s campaign finance laws.

Most notably, a footnote in the letter indicated MacDonald could require corporations making contributions in the state to register and report as political committees.

Under current state law, political committee registration is required for organizations making expenditures of $5,000 or more annually, even if the organization does not have as its major purpose to promote the success or defeat of candidates or measures. This regulation has been in place for several years during which corporate registration has not been the practice.

There is an exception to registration for organizations registered as business entities, but additional guidance on who qualifies as a business entity has not yet been made available.

Though there has been no change in the law to trigger a change in enforcement, MacDonald has indicated he is ramping up enforcement of campaign finance violations.