Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />limitations, while quite appropriate at the time of <br />enactment, become progressively more constricting <br />with advancing inflation. Therefore, the League <br />recommends that certain of the more important <br />and often used authorizing statutes containing dol- <br />lar limitations be modified by application of a <br />constant dollar index figure calculated from the <br />year of enactment, to the limitation set out in the <br />act. The modification should be made so that when <br />statutes relating to other statutes are modified, the <br />dollar limitations are adjusted in a uniform man- <br />ner. <br /> <br />11-4. Campaign Financing and Disclosure <br /> <br /> Campaigns and elections to local office are <br />the most important single contact between voters <br />and representative local government. On the whole, <br />the general public has more confidence in the <br />election process at the city level because the candi- <br />dates are usually well known (especially in smaller <br />cities) and campaign activities are more visible than <br />at other levels of government. Moreover, city <br />candidates running for offices which are, for the <br />most part, Iow paid, part-time, and non-partisan, <br />are generally motivated by a sense of civic respon- <br />sibility. <br /> <br /> The League perceives no need for new laws <br />in the area of local campaigns, although it could <br />support legislation which would simplify the elec- <br />tion process or would encourage rather than <br />discourage qualified candidates for local office. <br /> <br />The League supports the following: <br /> <br />1. Extending income tax credits for contri- <br /> butions to city election campaigns; <br /> <br />Eliminating unrealistic expenditure limits for <br />city campaigns and instead, giving cities the <br />authority to establish limits on campaign <br />contributions from individuals and organi- <br />zations as a means of controlling spending <br />by candidates. <br /> <br />Giving cities over 20,000 the authority <br />to enact campaign disclosure ordinances for <br />organizations and individuals. Requiring <br />reports in cities over 20,000 of each contri- <br />bution over $100 or more from a single <br />source. <br /> <br />4. Eliminating any distinction between types of <br /> campaign committees in cities over 20,000. <br /> <br />The League opposes the following: <br /> <br />A state-mandated requirement of candidates <br />for city office to file statements of economic <br />interest because it is most likely to discour- <br />age many qualified candidates from seeking <br />or continuing in office. <br /> <br />Campaign contribution limits or reporting <br />requirements in cities with less than 20,000 <br />population which are made unnecessary <br />because of conflict of interest rules govern- <br />ing the actions of elected officials in all <br />cities. <br /> <br />11-5. Collateral for Depositories (B) <br /> <br /> Depositories now are required to collateralize <br />the deposits of local government in the amount of <br />110%. Local depositories now serve as a valuable <br />market for bond issues of local school districts, <br />counties, and cities. If the amount of collateral re- <br />quired is reduced, this market will also be reduced, <br />making it more difficult to sell municipal bonds. <br />Also, if the collateral is purchased by a state <br />agency on behalf of all depositories, the existing <br />cooperative arrangement between local deposi- <br />tories and local governments will be destroyed and <br />local governments may deposit their funds in larger <br />depositories located outside of the community. <br />Therefore, the League recommends that the <br />legislature keeps the collateral requirements for <br />depositories at their present levels and opposes <br />any reduction, and also opposes the purchase of <br />collateral by any agency other than a depository. <br /> <br />11-6. Election Day Registration (B) <br /> <br /> The principal purpose of the Minnesota system <br />of election day registration is to improve and in- <br />crease eligible voter access to voting. Unfor- <br />tunately, the system has become more unworkable <br />especially in the larger and faster growing cities, <br />where individuals are not using the pre-election day <br />registration and where there are a growing number <br />of multiple registrations adding to the costs of elec- <br />tions and to the frustrations of the voters. For <br />these reasons, the League believes that registration <br />should take place before election day. The follow- <br />ing steps, however, would improve the current <br />system. <br /> <br />Election day registration and voting should <br />be permitted, but no mandated, to take <br />place in adjacent rooms. <br /> <br />-5- <br /> <br /> <br />