San Mateo exploring campaign spending limits

At its Sept. 5 meeting, the council agreed to ask staff to look into an ordinance that would use a capping measure on campaign financing based on the number of residents in an election district. The capping measure would be $2.50 for every resident. The city has five council districts following a transition to district elections in 2021, and councilmembers must live in the district they represent. The estimated limit for most districts under the $2.50 number would be around the $50,000 mark. Other options considered were $1.50 and $2. During the 2022 election, the amount of money raised by candidates running ranged from $17,000 to $57,000. Future ceiling adjustments could be 25 cents per resident in an odd number year or by consumer price index.

The council argued prohibitive costs could disillusion voters, make it harder for candidates to finance an election run and decrease citizen influence. Councilmember Rich Hedges suggested excluding filing fees and litigation from the limits and ensuring the financial incentives were not prohibitively low to discourage candidate acceptance.

“I want to set the limit high enough so people actually want to do it,” Hedges said.

In February, the council directed staff to research public financing around campaign finance reform policies, expenditure limits and disclosure requirements. The 2022 City Council campaign had seven candidates run and raise $199,036 in total contributions, with an average of around $28,000 raised per candidate. The 2020 elections saw $263,562 raised for only three candidates.

A council majority at the meeting also expressed interest in looking into public financing of election campaigns to reduce reliance on private donations and to make it easier for the next generation of leadership to run for office. Mayor Amourence Lee said it would help lower barriers to entry for candidates and help increase underrepresented communities in elected office.

“We do have a responsibility to look at how we implement policies that make our democracy healthier,” Lee said.

Potential options include looking at a matching funds model like San Francisco, where every dollar raised from small donors is matched by the city with a predetermined amount of public funds, according to a staff report. Potential models also include a matching option where a candidate receives a certain number of dollars in public funding for every dollar of private contributions raised. Some cities like Berkeley have adopted a policy in which candidates receive a 6-to-1 match on campaign donations. Other possibilities include grant-based funding, voucher funding in which eligible residents receive city dollar values to contribute to a participating candidate or reimbursements for qualified expenditures. Deputy Mayor Lisa Diaz Nash argued against the idea at this time, noting there were other issues around the city’s housing element, stormwater infrastructure and staffing shortage that were more pressing. City staff will bring back further information on specific numbers for public funding for election campaigns.

curtis@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102