Nobody has watched the city council campaign contributions over the last 20+ years as much as I have, unless maybe they were on the ballot themselves. Even then, I doubt it. Back in 2007, B'game-specific limits were imposed. That was the Dark Ages of fundraising. These days you can raise a boatload of "outside" money, meaning from outside of B'game, by getting on one or the other social media platforms and begging. It has already happened here. So why the archaic limits? You could ask "why any limits at all?" but let's save that for another day. In the meantime, as the DJ is reporting:
In a split vote, the Burlingame City Council this week opted to increase campaign contribution limits from $719.93 to $4,900, scrapping the lower citywide limit and defaulting to the state rule allowing larger contributions from individuals and organizations.
The local rule, established in 2007, had set a $500 limit for individuals and $1,000 for organizations, numbers that have been adjusted upward to account for inflation over time. The most recent cap for organizations was $1,439.87. In the beginning of this year, a state rule went into effect limiting contributions to $4,900 from both individuals and organizations in cities or counties that had not previously set stricter rules.
We don't see all that many split-votes unlike the Olde Days in town. But in this case, I love this logic. It may be twisted, but B'gamers are not the ones doing the twisting:
“I think people should be able to raise within the limits of the state,” Councilmember Donna Colson said. “The state has told us what to do around housing, the state has told us what to do around transit, sea level rise, lots of things, so why wouldn’t we comply also with the state regarding the elections.”
I will get to the nuances of the soon-to-be-implemented district council elections next week, but in the meantime rai$e what you think you need and maybe a bit more because the dark money from outside B'game is waiting to pounce--particularly the YIMBYs.
Recent Comments