My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_1206_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_1206_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2014 4:35:22 PM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:46:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Council Regular Meeting —11/22/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 12 <br />such contributions provided an impact on decision-making <br />revealing a need for change and evidence of where the problems <br />existed. <br />Professor Schultz concluded that the proposed ordinance was <br />good law as far as a first step, opining that a$100 contribution <br />disclosure may represent a good first compromise. <br />Councilmember Ihlan requested Professor Schultz' opinion on <br />timing of the ordinance, proposed for enactment by January 1, <br />2005. <br />Professor Schultz deferred to the City Attorney as to timing of <br />readings, opining that it made sense to have the ordinance <br />applicable for the entire calendar year to cover the entire election <br />cycle. <br />Councilmember Maschka questioned whether there was an <br />unintended consequence to such an ordinance in favoring the <br />incumbent, given fundraising availability and sources. <br />Professor Schultz responded that disclosure laws were different <br />than contribution limits, which were set by the State of <br />Minnesota. Professor Schultz opined that there wasn't much <br />evidence that disclosure laws hampered overall fundraising; and <br />that while requiring disclosure over $100 may preclude them <br />giving that without being anonymous and might dissuade some <br />people, a trade off was that Roseville was making a clear policy <br />statement. <br />Councilmember Kough questioned how a candidate could <br />control fundraising from independent campaign committees <br />formed on behalf of that candidate and not within the candidate's <br />accountability control. <br />Professor Schultz opined that the City could amend the <br />ordinance to include or exclude independent committees, and <br />provide clear labeling requirements, via ordinance, of any <br />campaign literature or advertisement. <br />Councilmember Schroeder questioned what type of information <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.