• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
 1
Final Determination No. 2009-1 (October 21, 2009)----------------------------------------------------------------------xIN THE MATTER OF
Michael Bloomberg and Bloomberg for Mayor 2009, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------xI. Introduction
The Campaign Finance Board (the “Board”) issues this determination concerning its
investigation of the complaint filed by New Yorkers for Thompson against Michael Bloomberg
(“Bloomberg”) and Bloomberg for Mayor 2009, Inc. (the “Committee”), the committee that
Bloomberg authorized to aid his 2009 re-election campaign for mayor. For the reasons set forth below, the Board finds that political contributions made by Bloomberg with his personal funds to political committees that support candidates in New York City and throughout New York State(except political committees of other candidates) are presumptively campaign expenditures infurtherance of his campaign. The Board, however, has never previously clarified to candidatesthat they must report to the Board political contributions made with personal funds, and thusdoes not require Bloomberg or any other candidate to report the political contributions at issuefor the 2009 election cycle.This determination clarifies that: 1) political contributions of more than $99 to politicalcommittees (except political committees of other candidates) that support candidates in NewYork City and throughout New York State
(“non
-candida
te political committees”)
, made by acandidate with his or her personal funds, are presumptively campaign expenditures infurtherance of his or her campaign; and 2) effective January 12, 2010, participating, limited participating, and non-participating candidates
(“candidates”)
must report such contributionsunless the candidate rebuts the presumption that the contributions are in furtherance of his or her campaign.Appended to this determination is a list of candidat
es’ political contributions of mor 
ethan $99 made with personal funds in the 2009 election cycle to non-candidate politicalcommittees.
1
However, for candidates who were not eligible to run for the same office again because of term limits prior to the introduction of the legislation extending term limits (October 7, 2008), the Board finds that these candidates
’
 political contributions made with personal funds prior to the introduction of the legislation were not in furtherance of their campaigns and thus hasnot included these contributions in the list. For the 2009 election cycle, candidates who have not
1
 
The list is based on financial activity reported by non-candidate political committees to the New York State Board
of Elections (“NYS BOE”) and the Federal Election Commission (“
FEC
”
). The list may include political
contributions that are not in furtherance of a candidate’s campaign, or omit political
contributions in furtherance of a
candidate’s campaign
, because candidates have not had an opportunity to rebut the presumption or the opportunity
to add contributions in furtherance of their campaigns, and because the list is based on the recipient’s d
isclosure of such contributions.
 
 
 2reported political contributions of more than $99 made with personal funds to non-candidate political committees as campaign expenditures will not be found in violation of the New York Ci
ty Campaign Finance Act (“Act”)
2
and Board Rules, and such contributions will not be
considered in the Board’s audit review of disclosure reports
filed. Effective as of January 12,2010, however, the Board will require all candidates to report these types of politicalcontributions to the Board, and any failure to do so may result in a finding of a violation of theAct and Board Rules.
II.
 
Background
On August 20, 2009, the Board received a complaint from New Yorkers for Thompson, pursuant to Board Rule 7-01, requesting that the Board: (1) find that Bloomberg and theCommittee violated the Act and Board Rules by failing to report to the Board campaignexpe
nditures in the form of political contributions made from Bloomberg’s personal account; (2)
order Bloomberg and the Committee to immediately report all campaign expenditures, includingall political contributions made by Bloomberg, made during the 2009 election cycle; and (3)assess civil penalties against Bloomberg and the Committee for violations of the Act and BoardRules.
Prior to the Board’s receipt of the complaint, the Board had never been presented with a
matter where a candidate made a substantial number and amount of political contributions from
his or her personal account rather than the candidate’s committee account.
The Board received a response to the complaint from the Committee on September 14,2009. The response asserts that there is no requirement to report to the Board politicalcontributions made from
Bloomberg’s
personal account and that the complaint should bedismissed.
III.
 
Analysis of the complaintA.
 
Reporting requirements for non-participating candidates are the same as thosefor participating candidates.
The disclosure requirements for Bloomberg, who is a non-participating candidate in the2009 election for mayor, are identical to the disclosure requirements for participating candidates.
See
Admin. Code §§ 3-703(1)(d), 3-703(6), 3-719(1). Section 3-719(1) of the Act, which liststhe disclosure obligations of non-participating candidates, was enacted into law in 2004 with the
express purpose of creating “uniform disclosure” requirements for all candidates seeking public
office of the City of New York and applying the disclosure and audit provisions of the Act tonon-participating candidates.
See
Local Law of the City of New York No. 59 (2004) (explaininggovernment interests behind § 3-719(1), such as promoting transparency of campaign spending practices and facilitating public scrutiny of campaign finances); New York City CouncilCommittee on Governmental Operations Briefing Paper and Report of the Governmental AffairsDivision (October 26, 2004).
2
 
 New York City Administrative Code (“Admin. Code”) §§ 3
-701,
et seq.
 
 3The list of reporting obligations set forth in § 3-719(1) includes § 3-703(6), which states,in relevant part:Each participating or limited participating candidate and his or her principalcommittee, and each non-participating candidate and his or her authorizedcommittees shall report to the board every contribution . . . and every expendituremade by the candidate and such committee, including expenditures not subject tosection 3-706.§ 3-703(6)(a). Thus, § 3-719(1) establishes that there is no distinction between the types of expenditures that a non-participating candidate and a participating candidate must report
 – 
allcandidates and their committees are required to report every expenditure made by candidates andtheir committees. In addition, § 3-719(1) does not impose any disparate or extra reportingrequirements on non-participating candidates and does not set any limits on expenditures by non- participating candidates, thereby avoiding any constitutional issues under 
 Buckley v. Valeo
, 424U.S. 1 (1976), and its progeny.The obligation to provide information requested by the Board relating to campaigncontributions and expenditures is also the same for non-participating and participatingcandidates. Under Section 3-703(1)(d), non-participating candidates and their authorized
committees must “
obtain and furnish to the campaign finance board . . . any information it mayrequest relating to his or her campaign expend
itures or contributions . . . .”
 
See
§ 3-719(1).Accordingly, there is no distinction in the type of expenditures that a non-participatingcandidate must report compared to those of a participating candidate, nor is there any difference between their obligations in providing information requested by the Board.
B.
 
Candidates must report all campaign expenditures, including politicalcontributions.
Based on the applicable law, and consistent with the Board’s interpretation of the law
concerning the disclosure requirements applicable to political contribut
ions, “every expenditure”
subject to disclosure under § 3-703(6) includes expenditures in furtherance of a campaign, suchas political contributions. None of the exceptions to the expenditures subject to disclosure under § 3-703(6) includes political contributions.
See
§ 3-703(6)(b)(i)-(iv). In addition, § 3-702(21)
defines the terms “expenditure” and “campaign expenditure” to “include all payments andliabilities in furtherance of a political campaign for covered office.”
3
 The Board has consistently considered political contributions to be campaignexpenditures.
See
,
e.g 
., Advisory Opinion No. 1993-12 (December 16, 1993) (concluding that
3
Section 3-702(21) was added to the Act to ensure that certain types of expenditures would not be considered non-campaign related by the Board, which could result in the need for a public funds repayment to the Board and/or theimposition of penalties, but nothing in the text of the statutory provision or its legislative history modifies § 3-
703(6)’s requirement that all candidates and their committees rep
ort every expenditure. In addition, § 3-702(21)was not intended to create a different definition of expenditure or campaign expenditure for non-participatingcandidates.
See
New York City Council Report of the Governmental Affairs Division, Committee on GovernmentalOperations (June 21, 2007).
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...