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.

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.

The United States Supreme Court declined to review a federal appeals case that held New York City’s campaign finance laws are constitutional. Tom Ognibene, a New York republican, challenged the city’s laws saying that the Citizens United decision effectively overruled the provisions.

In December, a federal appeals court disagreed with Ognibene, holding that the city’s rules prohibiting corporate contributions to political campaigns and requiring candidates to disclose all contributions from individuals and organizations were justified to prevent corruption in elections. The appellate court held that the Citizens United decision only applied to independent expenditures by corporations, not to contribution limits.

The independent expenditure rules that were previously adopted by the New York City Campaign Finance Board were published in the City Record and have an effective date of May 16, 2012. The new rules will not be enforced for any election occurring prior to August 13, 2012.

The rules cover what type of expenditures and communications must be reported to the Board, which contributions supporting those expenditures must be reported to the Board, who must file with the Board, and when those reports have to be filed with the Board.

Social Media News

“Top 14 Government Social Media Initiatives” by J. Nicholas Hoover in Information Week.

“How Social Media Is Keeping the GOP Primary Going” by Micah Sifry in TechPresident.

IT News

“New York Officials Promise Reforms After Scathing IT Audit” by Matt Williams in Governing.

“Baltimore’s top IT official resigns after alleged ethical violations emerge in N.Y.” by Gus Sentementes in The Baltimore Sun.

Open Data

“In New York, Landmark Open Data Legislation Will Soon Be Up for a Vote” by Sarah Lai Stirland in TechPresident.

According to a press release, “During a regularly scheduled meeting today, the Campaign Finance Board determined that nine campaigns in the 2009 elections committed violations and one campaign in the February 2009 special election committed violations. ”

You can view a video archive of the meeting here:

NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK:  The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed a challenge to the city’s campaign finance laws.

The laws which prohibit corporate contributions to political campaigns and require candidates to disclose contributions from people and groups that do business with the city were found to not violate constitutional free speech rights and to appropriately address the risk of corruption.

The plaintiffs argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission made the laws unconstitutional. The Court rejected that argument, finding that Citizens United applies only to independent corporate expenditures, and not to contributions limits such as those enacted by New York City.

Photo of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse by Americasroof on Wikipedia.

Amy Loprest, Executive Director of the New York City Campaign Finance Board, testified last Friday before the City Council about the effects of the Citizens United decision on New York City’s campaign finance regulation.

According to their press release:

“Campaign Finance Board Executive Director Amy Loprest testified before the City Council Committee on Governmental Operations regarding the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision earlier today. The Council is considering a resolution that calls for a Constitutional amendment to reverse the decision and establish that corporations are not entitled to the same rights as natural persons.”

“Recognizing a First Amendment right where none had previously been found, Citizens United opened the floodgates to allow massive amounts of unlimited—and too often, undisclosed—independent spending by corporations, unions, and other groups,” Loprest said.

Here is a link to a pdf file of the entire testimony.

Who can possibly top New York City? This week’s Highlighted Site of the Week is the city government’s NYC Digital. Their statistics are staggering: a four million digital audience, 202 million pageviews of NYC.gov in 2010, 52 agencies represented, 4000 points of engagement, 98% residential broadband access, 200 social media channels, and – as they are proud to say – it is all because they have one plan for New York City’s digital future.

According to the site: “New York City is one of the world’s leading digital metropolises. As Part I: State of the Digital City illustrates, New York City government engages over 25 million people a year through more than 200 digital channels including NYC.gov, mobile applications, and social media.”

They work hard to promote civic engagement, encourage new business startups with their Business Solutions Centers, and host hackathons where they provide city data to programmers so they can write cutting edge web and mobile applications to help the city. For those involved in government relations, their Lobbying Bureau page has many links in its helpful FAQ list.

The hundreds of NYC Social Media Sites range from the mayor’s office Twitter feed and Children’s Services’ Facebook, to the Departments of Aging,  Buildings, Business, Community Affairs, Education, and many more. Take a look at their 21 Mobile Apps, where you can have information about the road conditions, sports events, Department of Health updates, directions for getting around the city, sanitation department info, and the latest news from the mayor’s office sent directly to your mobile phone.

NYC Digital is as big as the city itself and just as humbling, I must say. Have a terrific weekend, everyone!

Photo of the New York City skyline at night by Francisco Diez on Wikipedia.

The New York City Lobbying Commission has released its recommendations to update and enhance the city’s lobbying laws.

In its preliminary report, the commission recommends expanding the definition of lobbying to include efforts to influence legislation prior to a bill’s introduction, efforts to keep a bill from being introduced, or efforts to shape or stop executive orders by the mayor.  The commission also recommends raising the threshold for lobbyist registration from $2,000 to $5,000.  The commission rejected suggestions to move regulation of lobbying from the city clerk’s office to another office.

The commission’s final report will be submitted to Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the City Council who, if they agree with the recommendations, can introduce legislation incorporating the changes.

Photo of the Manhattan Municipal Building by Momos on Wikipedia.