Houston City Council will revisit its campaign finance reimbursement ordinance at its Ethics and Governance Committee meeting June 18.
Some background
The ordinance was passed in 2016 and placed a limit on how much a candidate can reimburse themselves using campaign contributions. According to the city’s code, for mayoral campaigns, it limited reimbursement to $75,000. For other citywide campaigns, such as controller or at-large offices, the limit is $15,000. For district council offices, the limit is $5,000.
However, in 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of the Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate that a similar federal restriction violated the First Amendment.
According to the proposed city agenda item based on the Supreme Court’s ruling, sponsors say the ordinance is now in violation of federal rulings.
What's happening?
On May 13, council member Edward Pollard, using the city’s Proposition A rule, which allows members to put items on the agenda, put a proposal to repeal the city’s limitation on how much a candidate can be reimbursed for contributing to their campaign.
During the meeting, some members questioned whether there should be further discussion of the rule.
Council member Twila Carter said she isn’t opposed to limitations, but it should be sent to the ethics committee to look at why the caps were put in place to begin with. At-large council member Amy Peck agreed. She said she does not believe that removing every cap is the solution.
“My concern is that if we remove every single guardrail, we risk a system where only wealthy individuals can afford to run for office,” Peck said. “One of the strengths that we see here on City Council is having different people from different backgrounds and experiences because that really reflects the city.”
However, Pollard asked City Attorney Arturo Michel if the city would be at risk of being in conflict with the federal ruling. Arturo said he wrote a memo that points out concern that the current ordinance may not be supportable legally if it were challenged in court.
“Right now, we have a local ordinance that is in direct conflict with the ruling by the Supreme Court,” Pollard said. “And now we want to refer it to a committee.”
What they are saying
Pollard said the council’s decision to send the proposed amendment to the ethics committee was “politics” and he was surprised by it, as he had already discussed it with members and they showed support.
“[The ordinance] violates the First Amendment of free speech,” he said. “Something that should have been clear-cut turned into something that was unforeseen, politically.”
Council member Joaquin Martinez, who chairs the committee, said they want to tackle these kinds of issues.
“I’m happy to take this on. We have been looking at other Chapter 18 [ethics and financial disclosure] amendments as well,” he said. “It’s important that everyone realizes it’s a groundwork initiative.”
What’s next
The next Ethics and Governance Committee meeting is June 18. Meetings only happen a few times a year, and Martinez said he hopes that council members show up to learn and discuss how issues like Proposition A and financial disclosures work.
