Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
Agenda Item
9 25-0054 Subject: Campaign Reform Act: Temporary Increase In Contribution Limits
From: Councilmember Ramachandran And Councilmember Jenkins
Recommendation: Adopt An Ordinance Amending The Oakland Campaign Reform Act, Oakland Municipal Code Sections 3.12.050 Limitations On Contributions From Persons And, 3.12.060, Limitations On Contributions From Broad-Based Political Committees To Temporarily Raise Limitations On Contributions To Candidates
Contribution limits ensure that the the people's voices are heard in elections, rather than being drowned out by outside funders with excessive funds to put into our elections. I oppose the act to increase limits.
Oakland elections should be about what the everyday people of Oakland need and want, not about paving the way for outside CEOs and real estate developers to control our democratic process. We need to make sure Oakland elections are fair and accountable to the people of Oakland, just as voters mandated when they overwhelmingly passed the Oakland Fair Elections Act. This attempt to raise the limits on how much money can go to candidates directly contradicts the will of the voters. This is a big step in the wrong direction, especially considering that this meeting is taking place just a few weeks before the November election. Oakland City Council Members, if you believe in a more fair and equitable Oakland, accountable to regular Oaklanders, you need to vote NO on this amendment.
As the cost of campaigns go up, it creates an unfair disadvantage for ordinary citizens considering running for office. The citizens of Oakland voted for limitations and it's not up to the City Council to override the voters. Elected officials should not be for sale nor should the voters choice be violated. We cannot forget January 6, 2020 when elected officials supported overturning the will of the voters. The oath of office prohibits those elected to serve, like it or not, to uphold the constitution and the democratic process. The City Council are legally bound to enforce and abide by voter supported campaign reforms. There is a process to follow and it's called put it on the ballot and let the voters decide.
Oakland elections should reflect the hopes and needs of average Oakland residents, not out-of-town developers and charter school executives. The way to keep Oakland elections about Oakland is to limit the impact of cash on our electoral process. Oakland voters said as much when we passed the Oakland Fair Elections Act. Asking for an increase in donation limits before we have even implemented our voter-mandated financing program (Democracy Dollars) is a big step in the wrong direction. Oakland City Council Members, if you believe in a more fair and equitable Oakland, responsive to every day Oaklanders, you need to vote NO on this amendment to the Oakland Campaign Reform Act.
Oakland Rising opposes this amendment to the Campaign Reform Act. Oakland elections should reflect the hopes and needs of average Oakland residents, not wealthy donors. The way to keep Oakland elections about Oakland is to limit the impact of cash on our electoral process. Oakland voters said as much when we passed the Oakland Fair Elections Act. Asking for an increase in donation limits before we have even implemented our voter-mandated financing program (Democracy Dollars) is a big step in the wrong direction. Oakland City Council Members, if you believe in a more fair and equitable Oakland, responsive to every day Oaklanders, you need to vote NO on this amendment to the Oakland Campaign Reform Act.
This seems like the opposite intent of Democracy Dollars - we don't need to increase the limit for more outside money in politics from sources with the funds to be able to exceed existing campaign contribution limits.
Greetings. I am a resident of Oakland District 1, a minister, interfaith organizer, and union member. I supported, campaigned and voted for Democracy Dollars because I am sick of big money calling the shots even at the local level, yet alone at the state and national levels. The wealthy should have 1 vote, just like the rest of us. Instead, in effect, they get to vote numerous times over by using their dollars and corporate citizenship to promote laws that help them while harming the vast majority of us who can't afford to influence (bribe?) politicians via campaign contributions. Don't give them even more power. Please vote no raising limitations on campaign donations. Thank you. Rev. Millie Phillips
I am an Oakland resident, community volunteer, parent, and current candidate for D1 City Council and I oppose this amendment. The cosponsors claim that it acts in accordance with the spirit of the original legislation, but I argue that it flies in the face of the spirit of Measure W. The Democracy Dollars program in Measure W was supported by Oakland voters in hopes that less outside money would be spent on our elections, not more. The 'voter bucks' were intended on giving a voice to disenfranchised voters who struggle to make ends meet and wouldn't normally be able to fiscally support a candidate. Democracy Dollars instill in those voters a sense of agency and investment in the electoral process, driving increased rates of voter turnout.
Increasing maximum contributions will most likely bolster the political means of those more well-connected candidates at a higher rate than those less-resourced candidates who are relying on a greater quantity of smaller, individual contributions.
Amending this rule will also pour more money into what will be a contentious Mayoral race in the event that Mayor Thao is recalled.
Voters approved Measure W to get outside money out of our local politics and to give greater agency to those whose voices have been ignored for far too long. I repeat: this proposed amendment flies in the face of the spirit of Measure W. Please vote no.
Gail Wallace for the League of Women Voters of Oakland: The League opposes this proposal on the strength of findings in the MapLight report suggesting that raising limits would mostly benefit candidates who are already connected to wealthy donors. Moreover, this proposal moves us away from Oaklanders' express wish with the passage of the Fair Elections Act to move toward a system of public campaign finance in the form of Democracy Dollars. We note also the testimony of current elected officials and former candidates at the recent Rules Committee meeting to the effect that raising the limits are not needed for successful candidacies which rely more on person to person outreach and connection. Further, we believe that the measure is ill-timed and offers at best negligible benefits to candidates in this election cycle, but does burden the staff of the Public Ethics Commission.
There is too much outside money coming into Oakland. We must keep the campaign contribution limit and move to get the Fair Elections Act implemented. As a parent of 2 children in Oakland schools, I want us to listen to the people that live in the city and that are most impacted, not charter school companies that are draining our public funds and hurting our kids. Stop allowing outside money to have so much influence in our local elections. Engage more local small donors and stop the outside takeover of Oakland.
As a pediatrician serving Oakland, I advocate for the voice of the families that I serve which are essential workers that are the backbone of our community. I oppose raising the limit on contributions to candidates as this will unfairly skew our democracy toward the desires of the wealthy few. Please keep our democracy strong and fair and oppose this measure.
Contribution limits ensure that the the people's voices are heard in elections, rather than being drowned out by outside funders with excessive funds to put into our elections. I oppose the act to increase limits.
Oakland elections should be about what the everyday people of Oakland need and want, not about paving the way for outside CEOs and real estate developers to control our democratic process. We need to make sure Oakland elections are fair and accountable to the people of Oakland, just as voters mandated when they overwhelmingly passed the Oakland Fair Elections Act. This attempt to raise the limits on how much money can go to candidates directly contradicts the will of the voters. This is a big step in the wrong direction, especially considering that this meeting is taking place just a few weeks before the November election. Oakland City Council Members, if you believe in a more fair and equitable Oakland, accountable to regular Oaklanders, you need to vote NO on this amendment.
As the cost of campaigns go up, it creates an unfair disadvantage for ordinary citizens considering running for office. The citizens of Oakland voted for limitations and it's not up to the City Council to override the voters. Elected officials should not be for sale nor should the voters choice be violated. We cannot forget January 6, 2020 when elected officials supported overturning the will of the voters. The oath of office prohibits those elected to serve, like it or not, to uphold the constitution and the democratic process. The City Council are legally bound to enforce and abide by voter supported campaign reforms. There is a process to follow and it's called put it on the ballot and let the voters decide.
Oakland elections should reflect the hopes and needs of average Oakland residents, not out-of-town developers and charter school executives. The way to keep Oakland elections about Oakland is to limit the impact of cash on our electoral process. Oakland voters said as much when we passed the Oakland Fair Elections Act. Asking for an increase in donation limits before we have even implemented our voter-mandated financing program (Democracy Dollars) is a big step in the wrong direction. Oakland City Council Members, if you believe in a more fair and equitable Oakland, responsive to every day Oaklanders, you need to vote NO on this amendment to the Oakland Campaign Reform Act.
Oakland Rising opposes this amendment to the Campaign Reform Act. Oakland elections should reflect the hopes and needs of average Oakland residents, not wealthy donors. The way to keep Oakland elections about Oakland is to limit the impact of cash on our electoral process. Oakland voters said as much when we passed the Oakland Fair Elections Act. Asking for an increase in donation limits before we have even implemented our voter-mandated financing program (Democracy Dollars) is a big step in the wrong direction. Oakland City Council Members, if you believe in a more fair and equitable Oakland, responsive to every day Oaklanders, you need to vote NO on this amendment to the Oakland Campaign Reform Act.
This seems like the opposite intent of Democracy Dollars - we don't need to increase the limit for more outside money in politics from sources with the funds to be able to exceed existing campaign contribution limits.
Greetings. I am a resident of Oakland District 1, a minister, interfaith organizer, and union member. I supported, campaigned and voted for Democracy Dollars because I am sick of big money calling the shots even at the local level, yet alone at the state and national levels. The wealthy should have 1 vote, just like the rest of us. Instead, in effect, they get to vote numerous times over by using their dollars and corporate citizenship to promote laws that help them while harming the vast majority of us who can't afford to influence (bribe?) politicians via campaign contributions. Don't give them even more power. Please vote no raising limitations on campaign donations. Thank you. Rev. Millie Phillips
I am an Oakland resident, community volunteer, parent, and current candidate for D1 City Council and I oppose this amendment. The cosponsors claim that it acts in accordance with the spirit of the original legislation, but I argue that it flies in the face of the spirit of Measure W. The Democracy Dollars program in Measure W was supported by Oakland voters in hopes that less outside money would be spent on our elections, not more. The 'voter bucks' were intended on giving a voice to disenfranchised voters who struggle to make ends meet and wouldn't normally be able to fiscally support a candidate. Democracy Dollars instill in those voters a sense of agency and investment in the electoral process, driving increased rates of voter turnout.
Increasing maximum contributions will most likely bolster the political means of those more well-connected candidates at a higher rate than those less-resourced candidates who are relying on a greater quantity of smaller, individual contributions.
Amending this rule will also pour more money into what will be a contentious Mayoral race in the event that Mayor Thao is recalled.
Voters approved Measure W to get outside money out of our local politics and to give greater agency to those whose voices have been ignored for far too long. I repeat: this proposed amendment flies in the face of the spirit of Measure W. Please vote no.
Gail Wallace for the League of Women Voters of Oakland: The League opposes this proposal on the strength of findings in the MapLight report suggesting that raising limits would mostly benefit candidates who are already connected to wealthy donors. Moreover, this proposal moves us away from Oaklanders' express wish with the passage of the Fair Elections Act to move toward a system of public campaign finance in the form of Democracy Dollars. We note also the testimony of current elected officials and former candidates at the recent Rules Committee meeting to the effect that raising the limits are not needed for successful candidacies which rely more on person to person outreach and connection. Further, we believe that the measure is ill-timed and offers at best negligible benefits to candidates in this election cycle, but does burden the staff of the Public Ethics Commission.
There is too much outside money coming into Oakland. We must keep the campaign contribution limit and move to get the Fair Elections Act implemented. As a parent of 2 children in Oakland schools, I want us to listen to the people that live in the city and that are most impacted, not charter school companies that are draining our public funds and hurting our kids. Stop allowing outside money to have so much influence in our local elections. Engage more local small donors and stop the outside takeover of Oakland.
As a pediatrician serving Oakland, I advocate for the voice of the families that I serve which are essential workers that are the backbone of our community. I oppose raising the limit on contributions to candidates as this will unfairly skew our democracy toward the desires of the wealthy few. Please keep our democracy strong and fair and oppose this measure.