CC_Minutes_2004_0223 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting - 02/23/04 Page 12 advantages and disadvantages m encouragmg and/or discouraging larger contributions and their anonymity; perspectives of candidates and the public; campaign strategies and stances of opponents, and specific supporters. Professor Schultz addressed Pre-emption and whether such a local law would contradict state law; and recommended that City Attorney Anderson address the Roseville application in that area. Mayor Klausing asked Professor Schultz if he had found other statutory cities that had adopted similar disclosure requirements; with Professor Schultz responding negatively in his personal research. Mayor Klausing further addressed how such an ordinance would be enforced. Professor Schultz noted that one would have to assume the credibility of each candidate and that their signed affidavits represented good faith compliance. Mayor Klausing opined his uncertainty as to the legal ability of cities to enact such legislation, and not have local law challenged as to its compliance with state statute. City Attorney Anderson reviewed State Statute Chapter 555 related to declaratory judgment acts and the validity of such a local law; and whether a local regulation was irreconcilable with state regulation. Mayor Klausing sought to clarify the discussion for the benefit for the public; and thanked Professor Schultz for his presentation, and expertise. Councilmember Kough thanked Professor Schultz for his comments; opining his support for state campaign disclosure linlits in an effort to retain the privacy of donors. Councilmember Kough suggested that perhaps total contributions could be tied to Council and/or Mayor salaries. Professor Schultz noted that outright spending limits based on