The New York City Council has overridden Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto of a campaign finance bill loosening the disclosure requirements. The law, which will go into effect immediately, was fiercely opposed by both Bloomberg and New York City Campaign Finance Board Director Amy Loprest, but the City Council has nearly unanimously supported it from the outset.

The law will allow labor or other membership organizations, as well as corporations, to send campaign communications to its members, executive and administrative personnel, and stockholders without having to disclose that information to the Campaign Finance Board. According to Loprest, $35,000 in outside spending on mass mailers was spent in the two special elections since the city adopted its stringent rules.

In a statement Loprest said, “Disclosure helps voters understand who is speaking and trying to influence the outcome of their election. Just as important, disclosure helps voters hold candidates accountable for their supporters during an election and for the policies they pursue. New Yorkers want and deserve access to complete information about the interests supporting candidates for city office. The legislation approved by the Council today will hide some of that information from public view.”

Councilwoman Gale Brewer disagreed with this notion, saying “Member-to-member communications are not intended to influence the public. So, the public’s interest in source disclosure is significantly reduced.”

With city elections upcoming in November, both sides will see how these new rules actually affect the elections and spending.

Photo of the New York City Hall by Howrealisreal on Wikipedia.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg vetoed a campaign finance bill aimed at decreasing campaign finance disclosure, even though City Council overwhelmingly passed the bill by a 47-1 margin in January. The bill would have allowed labor or other membership organizations, as well as corporations, to send communications to its members, executive and administrative personnel, and stockholders without having to disclose that information to the Campaign Finance Board.

Bloomberg was noncommittal at the time about whether he would veto the bill, even though he was adamantly opposed to its passage. However, now with his decision to veto it, the ball will bounce back into the City Council’s court.

The council has 30 days to override the veto, with a two-thirds majority required, or allow the bill to die. The council had enough votes to override the veto originally, but there has been no word on whether every council member will stick with his or her original vote.

Photo of Mayor Michael Bloomberg by Rubenstein on Wikipedia.

The New York City Council overwhelmingly voted in favor of a campaign finance bill that has drawn sharp opposition from the city’s campaign finance board.

The bill will allow labor or other membership organizations and corporations to send communications to its members, executive and administrative personnel, and stockholders without having to disclose that information to the city. Currently, these types of expenditures would have to be disclosed, but the bill, if signed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, would eliminate that requirement.

The city council passed the measure by a vote of 47-1 ensuring that it has enough votes to survive a veto by the mayor. However, that has not stopped Mayor Bloomberg from expressing his displeasure with the bill. Bloomberg has not given a firm answer about whether he will veto the bill, but his spokesperson did say “the bill will only weaken the city’s strong campaign disclosure laws and he sees no reason why unions shouldn’t be held to the same standard as others who are advocating candidates for elective office.”

Earlier this month Amy Loprest, executive director of the city’s campaign finance board, spoke against the bill saying it would set the city’s landmark disclosure laws back and hurt the city’s voters. However, not everybody believes it is a bad thing.

Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause New York, praised the council’s vote saying, “this is the way in which a representative democracy should function with the city council exerting oversight to clarify important sections of the law. Membership organizations must be allowed to communicate with their willing members about the issues they collectively care about.”

Photo of the New York City Hall by Momos on Wikipedia.

Akron City Council has increased the city’s campaign contribution limits, to take effect for the council elections in 2013.

The limit for mayoral and at-large candidates will increase to $650 from $450, and the limits for ward council candidates will increase to $400 from the current $200 limit.

The limits were previously raised in February 2011.

The city council has introduced a bill that would change the way unions and corporations, among others, could contribute to elections. The bill, introduced by Councilmember Rosie Mendez, would remove contribution limits on unions or other membership organizations and corporations for communications aimed at its members, stockholders, or employees. The only catch would be that the union or corporation must use reasonable efforts to restrict the communication to its members, employees, or stockholders.

Those in favor say that it will allow a small non-profit group to disseminate a candidate’s photograph in its newsletter. Councilmember Gale Brewer said, “You cannot put a television ad, you cannot do that now, and have a communication. This is just member to member.”

However, not everyone agrees. Amy Loprest, executive director of the city’s campaign finance board said, “I think we have one of the best campaign finance laws in the country, and this is a big step backwards.”

The bill was sent to the council’s committee of governmental operations where a hearing will be held on Thursday. A full city council vote could come as soon as next week. At this point, it is impossible to tell whether the council will pass the bill. But, either way, it is sure to drum up some strong emotions during debate.

Photo of the New York City Hall courtesy of Howrealisreal on Wikipedia.

One measure limits gifts to the mayor and councilors to $50 or less. Another measure creates an ethics board to enforce the newly created gift limits.

The measures were somewhat controversial because many thought the gift restrictions were not strict enough.

Implementation of Measure H, a campaign finance reform approved by voters earlier this year, has been delayed by the Los Angeles City Council.

Measure H bans campaign contributions from contractors to elected officials responsible for reviewing proposals for city work valued at $100,000 or more.

Photo of the Los Angeles by BRION Vibber on Wikipedia and the Seal of Los Angeles by Mysid on Wikipedia.

Amid declining web traffic and engagement, Cuyahoga County Council has turned to social media as a way to better engage its constituents.

Today’s Cleveland Plain Dealer features “Cuyahoga County Council streams meetings, turns to social media” by Harlan Spector. The article reveals that the Cuyahoga County Council is now on Facebook, has a Twitter account, and offers live video streaming of council meetings.

I also found a county government YouTube channel and separate Facebook.