House members will hold a special, one-day session to consider two bills vetoed by Gov. Nikki Haley on Wednesday, August 27, 2014. The bills would allow public libraries keep out disrupters and permit a local tax hike for firefighting in coastal Murrell’s Inlet and Garden City.

The Senate voted overwhelmingly to override the vetoes, but those votes occurred after the House had adjourned in June. An override requires a two-thirds vote in both chambers.

U.S. District Court Judge D. Brock Hornby ruled in favor of four supporters of independent gubernatorial candidate Eliot Cutler who sued the state of Maine, alleging minor parties are at a disadvantage under sections 1015(1) and 1015(2) of Chapter 21-A of the Maine Revised Statutes. These provisions of law impose a per election limit of $1,500 per individual or entity.

Hornby granted a preliminary injunction, reasoning the per election limit unconstitutionally applied to supporters of Cutler. This ruling effectively allows supporters of Cutler to increase their contributions to $3,000 during the upcoming general election.

Whether the ruling will be appealed by the state is unclear.

The New York City Council is considering a measure increasing disclosure requirements for those making independent expenditures to influence city elections. Introduction 148 will require individuals and entities making independent expenditures totaling $5,000 or more to disclose the owners, partners, board members, or their equivalents of any entity reporting the expenditure. The measure further requires an individual or entity who transfers $1,000 or more to another individual or entity for the purpose of such other individual or entity making independent expenditures to report the transfer of money as if the transferor has directly made the independent expenditure.

Another provision of the measure requires individuals or entities to disclose detailed information on any electioneering communications, such as the top five donors to the entity responsible for the communication, and names of the owner and CEO of the entity.

Amy Loprest, the executive director of the New York City Campaign Finance Board, applauded the new disclosure requirements, saying, “This legislation will give voters a more complete view of who is paying for the campaign ads that fill their mailboxes and airwaves.”

If passed, Introduction 148 will take effect one year after its enactment.

Legislators have approved an expansion of pay-to-play rules in response to a controversy involving suspended Sen. Ronald S. Calderon and his brother, former Assemblyman Tom Calderon. The two Democrats from Montebello made large campaign donations to most members of the Central Basin Municipal Water District Board before it approved a consulting contract for Tom Calderon.

Assembly Bill 1728 will add elected water board members throughout California to the list of officers who may not accept campaign contributions of more than $250 from donors with business pending before their boards. Officers must abstain from voting on pending business matters if such a donation has been received during the previous year.

The legislation now goes to Gov. Jerry Brown.

After 163 legislative days, the North Carolina General Assembly has adjourned sine die.

The adjournment is several weeks overdue as legislators hotly debated such contentious issues as pay increases for educators and the dumping of coal ash.

Photo of the North Carolina Legislative Building by Jayron32 on Wikimedia Commons.

Executive Director Jeff Brindle of the Election Law Enforcement Commission is calling for comprehensive pay-to-play reform after critics revealed a loophole in Trenton’s laws. The loophole became apparent after a South Jersey law firm was awarded a contract with the city worth up to $20,000.

One of the firm’s founding partners was serving as the treasurer of a PAC when the PAC donated $8,200 to the election campaign of Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson. Because neither the law firm nor any of its partners made a donation to the PAC, the contract award was not deemed a violation of the city’s pay-to-play law.

Critics, however, want the law revised to include such contract awards. Part of Brindle’s recommendations for reform include simplifying complex laws, creating a single pay-to-play law to apply to all governments at the state, county, and local levels, and prohibiting the pay-to-play loophole for publicly bid contracts.

The Oklahoma Ethics Commission will consider a rule amendment permitting it to collect registration fees from lobbyists, lobbyist principals, political action committees, and candidate committees. The proposed amendment would also allow the executive director to establish and collect registration fees from those participating in training events or educational classes and seminars.

If the amendment is approved, the commission would be required to publish a fee schedule on July 1 of each year beginning in 2015. There will be a public hearing and possibly a vote on the proposed amendment during the September commission meeting.

The Board of Ethics formally submitted its revised Rules & Regulations to the City Council on August 19. The rules govern board activities in conformation with the provisions of the Governmental Ethics Ordinance.

Unless the City Council, by majority vote, votes to disapprove them, the rules will become effective 45 days after submission.

On July 30, the Chicago City Council enacted amendments to the Governmental Ethics Ordinance, chapter 2-156 of the Municipal Code of Chicago.

Changes include granting the Board of Ethics authority to review campaign finance filings and to refer potential violations to the appropriate investigating authority. Pay-to-play provisions have also been amended, affecting vendors, lobbyists, and any other person seeking to do business with the city.

Penalties are currently imposed only on the candidate, official, or employee accepting a prohibited contribution. Under the revised ordinance, however, the penalty provisions will also apply to persons making such contributions.

The amendments take effect September 10.

On August 14, Citizens United filed suit in federal court against Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler. The lawsuit is a response to Deputy Secretary of State Suzanne Staiert’s June decision classifying the group’s upcoming documentary as a reportable electioneering communication.

Citizens United had hoped the documentary would be excluded from the definition of reportable electioneering communication under a general press-entity exemption. Although the Federal Election Commission applies such an exemption for Citizens United at the federal level, the secretary of state lacked the authority to import the FEC’s analysis and decision.

Citizens United is now asking the court to permanently enjoin enforcement of applicable reporting and disclosure requirements in their entirety or, in the alternative, enjoin enforcement of the requirements as applied to Citizens United. The group argues its right to engage in political speech is significantly burdened while the rights of print media and broadcast facilities are not. Moreover, the group claims the reporting and disclosure requirements discriminate based on a speaker’s identity and, therefore, violate both the U.S. and Colorado constitutions.

The Washington Legislative Ethics Board has come to a preliminary conclusion as to how to define “infrequent occasions” as it relates to free meals accepted by the state’s legislators. Section 42.52.420 of the Revised Code of Washington allows public officials to accept gifts in the form of food and beverage on infrequent occasions so long as attendance at such a meal is related to the performance of official duties.

When the Legislature failed to pass any pertinent legislation defining infrequent occasions before its adjournment on March 13, 2014, the Legislative Ethics Board took up the issue. During its August 19, 2014, meeting, the board decided in a 5-3 vote to define infrequent occasions as 12 free meals per year. Under the proposed rule, a qualifying meal occurs when the guest would normally be expected to sit down and eat, such as in a restaurant or a private residence, as opposed to a legislative reception.

Other provisions of the rule, including a reporting requirement for legislators accepting free meals, are still under discussion. A final vote on the rule is scheduled for October 21, 2014.

A group called Grow Connecticut recently paid $193,000 to produce a television ad targeting incumbent democratic governor Dannel Malloy. The conservative super PAC made the ad buy on the same day the state’s Republican Party filed a complaint against the Governor’s campaign and Connecticut Forward, a similar group, for illegal coordination.

Connecticut Forward, created and funded by the Democratic Governor’s Association, has also paid over $100,000 in support of Governor Malloy. The recent activity by these two groups brings to light the influence of outside groups on publicly funded campaigns.

Both Governor Malloy and the Republican nominee, Tom Foley, are participants in the Citizen’s Election Program, which caps their campaign funds to a $6.5 million grant from taxpayers. The program was created in an attempt to insulate state campaigns from special interest groups. Groups like Grow Connecticut, however, are allowed unlimited independent expenditures, increasing the call for greater transparency through disclosure to the voters.

A ruling is expected in the coming days in a federal lawsuit challenging certain provisions of Maine’s campaign finance law.

Four supporters of gubernatorial candidate Eliot Cutler sued the state of Maine, alleging minor parties, including independent candidates, are at a disadvantage under sections 1015(1) and 1015(2) of Chapter 21-A of the Maine Revised Statutes. These provisions of law limit political contributions to a gubernatorial candidate from an individual, political committee, corporation, or business entity to $1,500 in any election.

Cutler is running as an independent and therefore did not participate in a primary election. As a result, the law only allows Cutler to collect $1,500 per contributor because he will only participate in the general election.

The plaintiffs are seeking both a preliminary and a permanent injunction to stifle enforcement of the $1,500 per election limit as applied to independent candidates. If U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby decides to enjoin the law, the injunction will apply to the 2014 election cycle.

Secretary of State Dianna Duran has dropped an effort to force Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gary King to return $10,900 in campaign contributions. Initially, Duran claimed the contributions violated campaign finance limits because donors were attempting to give for both the primary and general election after the date of the primary election.

In a letter to King, Duran updated her position by stating the questionable contributions were permissible as long as King shows the post-primary contributions were used to retire debt from the primary election. Duran also expects King to provide statements from the contributors indicating part of their contributions were intended to help with the candidate’s primary debt.

The decision will likely make moot a legal action King filed against Duran set for hearing by the state Supreme Court.