Item 10A
AGENDA ITEM # l0A
MARCH 26, 2007
Hanson, Jim
From: Alan Jensen [alan@ajensenlaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 1:26 PM
To: Hanson, Jim
Cc: Bussey, Donna
Subject: Campaign Spending Limits
s~•
Jim: The following information is provided for the benefit of the City Commissioners and the strategic planning
issue of campaign spending limits. I understand this will be put on the agenda for the next commission meeting
on March 26, 2007, under city attorney report. I have already provided you with copies of a synopsis of the
Supreme Court's ruling on campaign spending limits, as well as the decision issued by the Supreme Court in
Randall vs. Sorrell.
~ The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1976 that limitations on campaign expenditures were unconstitutional
and inconsistent with the First Amendment. Buckley vs. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976). The State of Vermont enacted
a campaign finance law in 1997 that imposed limits on campaign expenditures and strict limits on campaign
contributions. Vt.Stat.Ann., Tit.17, Sec.2801 et seq. (Also referred to as "Act 64") The constitutionality of this law
~. was challenged resulting in the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Randall vs. Sorrell, issued June 26, 2006.
In the case of Randall vs. Sorrell, 548 U.S. (2006), the Supreme Court held that both sets of
limitations, that is, limits on campaign expenditures and on campaign contributions, are inconsistent with the First
""' Amendment. The Court ruled that the Buckles vs. Valeo decision was still good law, and stated:
~We conclude that Act 64's expenditure limits violate the First Amendment as interpreted in Buckley vs. Valeo.
We also conclude
that the specific details of Act 64's contribution limits require us to hold that those limits violate the First
Amendment, for they burden
First Amendment interests in a manner that is disproportionate to the public purposes they were enacted to
,. advance."
Therefore, it is my understanding that the City Commission cannot impose any limits on campaign
spending, and that this has been the law of the land since at least 1976 and the Buckley vs. Valeo decision of the
"" U.S. Supreme Court. I will be more than happy to provide any further information to you and the City
Commissioners as you may desire.
ALAN C. JENSEN, ESQUIRE
935 North Third Street
P.O. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
Alan~AJensenLaw.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and alt attachments contained in this electronic communication
are legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return a-mail and please permanently
remove any copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or
physical form or otherwise. Thank you.
3/15/2007