So quick Read My Mind is now recording
and I'll call this meeting of December 3rd,
2025, July six and elections Commission to order items that
it was the Chair And joining me in the WebEx
platform are the Vice Chair,
Jonathan Sherman, and Commissioners on I submit
Commissioner Bobby Sparks will hopefully be joining us in.
Turning to the agenda, we have six
final action items excuse me.
I don't believe there's been any written public comment
submitted, none that I've seen, but there has been
no this I know there has not been
right
then removed.
So the first would be the appeal of Rye Armstrong
for the campaign's late filing penalty.
And just to alert the commissioners,
this is a different issue than what was addressed
at the November Commission meeting.
I think it'd probably be best
for Wayne to explain how that issue resolved
and then addressed this new issue and the petition
filed on behalf of the Armstrong White. Yes.
So after the last meeting, after I said,
after I see the contract and send you all the contract,
I gave some more thought to the decision not to award
the campaign the $30,000 for voucher gathering.
As I admitted in that meeting,
there was no violation of 16 j of evidence.
So based on that, I approve the $30,000
contract charge for voucher gathering.
And also we came to an agreement
or I told them $4,000 for one.
So I thought that was reasonable
and he did not object to that.
So that took care of all those issues.
As the chair said, I
gave him the authority to do that
and I thought that was a
proper resolution of those issues.
But at the same time, having granted him
$30,000 under that contract,
I was also troubled by the fact that
it was six months
the way it was filed, first filed with us in September.
It was that contract was signed in February.
So I did assess a late penalty filing for that
and also some payments to try for payments
he made to some campaign people over the filing fee
in the spring.
So that late filing was why I discussed it can be
1500 dollars.
So that's where we are today.
I just handed over to write and heard back to the chair.
Thank you for that explanation.
And yeah, I do understand that Rye has joined us.
I do want to note that
based on my review of last week's
meeting minutes,
it appears that Rye uses de them pronouns,
and it's wrong to ask permission
to use those 24% rise.
The price is right.
Do you mind if we call you overrides
or any other form of reason for her Rice.
Great. Thank you. That's perfect. Great.
Yeah. Please.
Right.
We've I've reviewed
and I assume other
commissioners have reviewed your response
to the commissioner,
to the executive directors
in possession of only filing penalty.
Is there anything you'd like to add highlight
in your appeal?
Yeah, I think there are two separate issues at play.
I'd like to speak to one being the reimbursement
set myself and then also this $30,000 payment.
Speaking to
my experience running for office, I think there is
a structural issue with the democracy voucher program
when it comes to a county's response
time for qualification and disbursement.
And the reason I as a working person has to take
on some of the burden of keeping our team running
is because there was a special election in April
and I was working with the team and it was take.
It took a lot longer
to get Parker than we anticipated on this
in in those amounts.
I actually in May started realizing
that there was this communication
breakdown between my treasurer
and my consultant,
something that you don't anticipate
obviously with the individuals.
I myself did a
personal audit of what was happening,
spending many hours that I probably shouldn't
as a candidate,
making sure that we were trying to be
in compliance as much as possible
in those filings, I think there was
a couple of items that were missed and delayed
reporting for sure, but then some response.
But it was always my intention to respond
this in a timely manner,
to give more context to my experience.
And I appreciate both Adam and Jean
the efforts
they put into the campaign, they very different workflows
to the to the point where there was a lot of technical
glitches with Jean's AOL email not receiving emails
or conversations happening over and over again
that she would then forget had happened.
A great example that is tonight.
She I had asked her and asked her to come
speak to this commission this evening.
And then
I received a phone call saying that she had a
doctor's appointment that she had forgotten about.
So she's not able to be here tonight.
At the same time, Adam and Bright
Blue Strategies uses FreshBooks
and the software that automates invoices
to the second point of the $30,000
that should have been reported by my consultant
to the Treasurer
well in advance of previous to that information.
It's hard for me to then feel like the campaign
is being fined for that when it feels like
that was the fault of the consultant.
And I understand that there's no way for
under current rules and regulations of the FCC to
then put that penalty on that consultant.
I would then argue that perhaps
consultants should be accredited
by the FCC
when working with the democracy voucher program
and take on a certain amount of liability
if they are to make mistakes during a campaign.
You know, running as a
young, queer, trans nonbinary person in Seattle,
there's a lot of obstacles
to the point where now I have lost my job.
I have another job lined up, but it will take me
between 3 to 6 months to pay back 1500 dollars
of a late fee.
And that is just my honest appeal to this committee
saying that I think we tried our best to be in compliance
with the law
and I found myself mediate between two parties
that I hired to run her campaign.
So it's an awful situation to be in.
I know that the CPC has tried their best to
navigate this with us, so I don't
blame anyone for the place we are now.
But I do think that,
one, it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the primary
in the primaries and similar
to that of, I believe, the stranger
just at all times endorses typically.
And then to,
you know, my consultant should have endorsed that
prior to that.
We're sending that to Jean in July.
And then Jean did not report that invoice until September.
I don't know where the communication
breakdown happened there.
I also won't be signing a contract
in the future for $30,000 lump, son.
But I think
perhaps this commission could take it upon itself
to make sure that there are that monthly payments,
that the only way that people
could contract as consultants in the future.
But I feel very much
taken advantage of by different parties.
And so it's really difficult to then
be fined after
we already
went through an appeal process for a primary
that was already six months ago.
So that's where I'm coming today with some frustration.
And, you know, obviously
you step forward to run for office because
you want to make a change in the community and
yeah, I don't want the experience
that I had running
to be tainted or my name to be tainted by a spy
that I felt like was not within my control.
But at the end of day, it was,
you know, my campaign that I was responsible for.
So that's kind of where I'm at.
That's what I have to say.
I appreciate that.
It used to be that pronouns, it is very important to me
to be involved that way.
So I appreciate that.
Zach and I will be able to answer any questions
people may have or if you want to respond back.
I was on the floor when it was announced. I appreciate it.
Thank you very much, Ryan.
And I, you know, I hear you.
And certainly running for office is a really
challenging thing to do, especially as an individual
compliance with disclosure requirements.
Campaign finance disclosure requirements
are a critical component of our democracy.
And fortunately,
it does not leave this commission
with a great deal of discretion,
particularly once a violation has been found.
For example, there's not a good faith standard
and in particular, I think one challenge
you face, you certainly raise
valid policy issues as to, you know,
whether the deadlines should be different or
whether there could be some sort of fine
imposed on consultants.
But the current statutory framework
doesn't permit for either of those things.
And it's beyond this Commission's
jurisdiction to weigh in on those issues.
So really, we're facing the kind of a straightforward,
clear and undisputed violation of filing deadlines.
And it really just comes down to whether the amount
of penalty assessed here is not only appropriate,
but whether it's so excessive that it defies
a rational basis.
That is the standard that the commission
has to apply here, whether the directors,
the executive directors
and all the lots of rational basis, not simply
we have to overturn it or modify it.
So I'd ask a follow up question to that.
Sure. Thank you.
Just specific to the reimbursements,
is it 21 business days or calendar days?
That is the requirement of reporting
reimbursed civil expenses, because it was unclear
to me a lot of those we tried to do within 21 days.
But in conversations that had been established
poorly, it's been unclear what the statute actually states.
And I would argue
that a lot of those reimbursements,
except for maybe the filing fee
because of its amounts and just
the Castille issues are campaign based
work within the legal reimbursement timeframe.
2021 calendar.
I can say
no. I mean, I think it is a calendar,
but any more importantly,
your written submission, Ryan does not raise
it says it does not contest that these findings
of the executive director that there would be four late
filed and an interest in looking at the deadlines.
Most were not even closer than what was given
to a six month point.
So now that so doesn't appeal,
like based on your appeal submission
and the written submissions, which
which is what we're really bound to do,
it really is just a question
of whether the amount is excessive.
And you
also you referenced in your appeal document
that the Wilson campaign had also been fined
early filing and frankly, it's not terribly uncommon.
And you sent us, as you know, a referendum on
your character or competency or anything like that.
You want people to comply
with the deadlines, obviously, and they're
extremely important
for transparency and democratic government.
But yeah,
simply making only filing does not mean
you are a bad person
or obviously you should not be elected to the position.
So, you know, I think one of the arguments raised
is that you're the amount of the penalty
assessed on your campaign
is excessive in relation to the Wilson campaign.
And my understanding and waitlist burden is,
if I'm wrong about this, is that the Wilson campaign
was assessed a penalty of $500, which is
smaller than the 1500 dollars assessed you, but that the
the degree of the violation was much lower.
I think
the Wilson campaign was
it was three weeks late when you have for
a little less than three weeks, 17 days less
so. So that to me
is a rational basis for a distinction
between the two parties.
And therefore, personally, I could not conclude
that that the assessment near the amount of the assessment
period blocks or rational basis
does not make sense.
Yeah, I think it's the purview
of the executive director to find, based on
his personal findings of what he's put forward.
I think it's it's just
frustrating to me that this is this has
now come up after the fact of the previous appeal
instead of being brought up at the same time previously.
So it just feels punitive.
But that's also the point, I think. So
I would just
yeah, I'm not sure what to say in response to that.
Yeah, to be honest. Right.
We could have run it at the same time.
I thought that would be
I thought would have been seemed excessive
if I was withholding that 30 withholding $32,000
and going after you. Really. If I would be.
I was worried about that seeming excessive.
That's why I didn't say time
passing.
Yeah.
I leave it up to this commission to decide.
Obviously, no candidate
ever wants to be fined that I probably work
with a different team in the future.
Yeah.
I'm not sure how I could have gone back in time
and prevented this from happening and all that
and all the obstacles that were present
in front of the enforcement.
Thank you.
I want one final if you wanted to raise this,
as you mentioned, that it would be
it would take you some time to to this assessment penalty.
I assume that the staff, the executive director
and the staff will be flexible on the deadline for payment.
When is that?
Is that correct?
Yes, we'd be happy to enter in a little bit.
You can spread it over some time. It's
that's good.
So I'm of course, one person
I want to give other commissioners
under the chance to ask any questions they may have
before we formally vote on the deal.
Mr. Hayes
seems to
have much more possibilities that happens
here in the budget.
And do you know where is think you
wait?
I'm just wondering
with respect to the assessment of the 1500 dollar fine,
you discuss the $500 fine to the Wilson campaign.
I want to
just to get a bit more color as to how you arrived
at the 1500 dollars in this instance.
I was just thinking of how long it had been
that six months versus the Wilson campaign's 17 days.
And just
make a little more conscious of Ryan's financial issues.
Yeah, I just
I tried to come up with what I thought was a fair fine.
Have you had any
other disclosures that were linked
to the extent of these were in recent memory?
And if so, was there
what was the fighting that was there to get you recall?
I think I had that leak before.
I can't really tell you right now. I'm sorry.
It's just I don't have anything in front of me.
But we've had a play by others in the past.
They've not commented on it for me.
Right.
I'll show you
something.
Sorry.
I guess I just want to follow up on that question.
In this cycle, were there any league failures
that were possessed?
I guess, Ali, first,
I just not to say no, actually, Ali,
I don't believe in any of the files that we talked
to. So, Ali, anything like this?
I think that's correct.
I believe that's correct.
Okay.
And when it sounds like you did,
but in assessing this, fine, did you take
into consideration the smaller nature of Rise campaign?
That is an individual
excuse me, that they are an individual and that,
you know, in comparison
to a more institutional
deal, I can see there was something happening,
especially if that that makes me nervous.
And I start doing that.
If I start saying like,
you're an outsider,
you're not part of this political establishment
or anything less
than the candidate who is part of the establishment.
But that gets very tricky, you know?
So I try not to think too much on that.
But any other comments from other commissioners
or questions?
I've got a more general question
when I know we have our website here
with all the regulations, but are there additional
materials provided to the candidates about
their minds for financial disclosures?
Yes, there are.
I he those extensive training.
So thank you.
Yeah.
I really can't fault police for anything.
I've gone through the trainings,
I've read the materials.
I think this really comes down
to a communication breakdown in a team
that was dysfunctional between a consultant
and a treasurer that did not get along
or refused to work with each other.
Unfortunately,
you may no additional comments
or questions from commissioners.
I think the appropriate
mechanism and we only need four.
So you know, Bob is not here yet.
Bobby is on color news.
Everyone down here in the corner.
Well, okay, Bobby, welcome.
Let's make it through the minutes.
We're talking to Bobby, who's in attendance as well.
So I think got to Paul.
Each of the commissioners
in order of seniority as to whether you vote
to affirm or reverse
the executive directors
assessment of the Ryan
from campaign for final tally.
And I suppose if you vote to reverse,
you can specify whether you're voted to
reverse it in its entirety or to
reduce the amount of the fine.
So a vice chair for
I would prefer
Mr. Commissioner Austin.
And as far
Commissioner for
your immediate body
of work, we can't hear you.
Did you vote for
Commissioner for two votes
to affirm as well got Commissioner Smith
vote to affirm.
I also vote to affirm the Senate.
And is that unanimous?
Berman's right.
Thank you for participating, for attending
and for your written submission.
Thank you,
Mike.
That concludes this matter.
Moving to action, Item number two of the agenda.
This would be the adoption of revised elections Code Rule
17 on revised contribution limits.
I've studied this, but
I still think it would be best if Wayne
tees it up and explains what is proposed here.
All right,
this is the election code rule,
which I think we've looked at three times now.
If we first gave it
to a couple months ago and last month, we heard again
before we published and published it
and this is the final time you're going to be seeing it.
I hope so.
The rule changes
the contribution limit for non program participants.
Actually program participants to 700,
it was 500
under the original
initiative that enacted the voucher program
and it went up to 6650.
So now is it seven
and also adjusts
the contributions of the four voucher candidates
or it doesn't. It just does.
That keeps those at 350.
So just as initially it was $500
for non Georgia participants versus 254 voucher
participants, it maintains that same 2 to 1 ratio.
So it's now 500 700 for voucher
non voucher program participants
and 350 for a voucher for just 350.
I should include
does it
include the amount of vouchers?
So that's actually pretty pretty
50 plus another hundred.
So if they get a voucher from somebody like up to 40.
So yeah, that's, that's all this does.
And it points out that
the elections,
the limits will be adjusted again
before the 2029 election cycle.
So that's an important thing
that also points out that these are these
limits are going to be in place
for District city council candidates
during the 2026 special election.
So that's the limits.
But I welcome any comments,
questions.
Yeah.
So I mean, my comment is I feel like at some point
there will be
there will be a point when there's a difference
between the contribution limit for two non
democracy voucher candidates and democracy
voucher candidates where
there could realistically be a disincentive
to participation in a democracy go to program.
I don't think we've reached that point here,
but because simply because of the
astounding benefit
that democracy voucher program participation conveys.
But I think we should be alert to that.
I urge future commissioners to be alert to that
when the gap becomes sufficiently large.
If it becomes sufficiently large
when those two sets of contribution limits,
the commission does have the authority,
of course, to adjust
contribution limits or democracy to democracy.
But for candidates up to the same point,
there's no democracy built into their contributions.
Under SNC 2.0 4.370.
You need not. You said we have discretion.
I continue to support the rule as proposed,
but I think we should
be mindful of that gap
going forward.
Do other commissioners have comments or questions
here?
You know, is there a motion to adopt
the proposed amendments to rule 17,
publicly motion to adopt?
Is there a second?
I'll second
any further discussion
or questions.
You know, I'm not all in favor
of blocking the amendments to Rule 17 as proposed.
Let's say I or raise their hand.
I, i,
I all oppose the same areas and
any abstentions.
The motion here is five commissioners in favor
not opposed, no abstentions.
We're moving on to the third item on the agenda,
the adoption of revised elections,
the rule 18 special elections.
Again, this is should be familiar
as it's been on the agenda for the last couple of months.
And the rule, as proposed, reflects
the commission's previous discussion and feedback way.
Do you want to provide
a brief explanation of this one as well?
Yes. I think the key things are that it says that the
democracy vouchers we were
praying to $50 vouchers to everyone in 85.
That was the biggest point of discussion we had.
So that's that's probably the main thing the school does.
And other than that, it's really
there's not much to the rule, as you can see.
So, yes, it updates everything for 2026.
Yeah, and we did have an extensive
discussion about this, I believe
it was in our October meeting.
Okay.
And it was in the Parliament has passed.
Yeah.
So anything, anything further from the commissioners about
the proposed amendments to roll 1870
special, the special election
in 2026.
Okay.
Without then is there a motion to adopt the roll so moved
and is that something
move by
Mr. Smith.
Burt if I hear you mention reports
any further discussion
area None.
All in favor of blocking
the proposed amendments to rule 18.
Please say hi again.
I. I opposed the same name for regime.
Any abstentions
and without the rules adopted
by the commissioners voting in favor of adoption,
the amendments to rule 18.
We're not opposed to abstentions.
Okay.
And then the November 5th draft
meeting minutes have been circulated.
Has any commissioner not had an opportunity
to review the November 5th meeting minutes?
He's being now referral to this.
Okay.
Any discussion of the meeting minutes
A non I would entertain a motion
to adopt the November meeting minutes
so move
we would like Mr.
Smith seconded by the Vice chair any further discussion
here and none all in favor of adopting the November
meeting minutes. Please stay. I ran i
I all of those Please
say I have or is losing or is
any abstentions
and the motion carries.
We now will go into
an executive session
to discuss
the performance, review the performance of a public
employee, specifically the executive director,
pursuant to public Employees Act.
It is expected that the Commission
will be in executive session for approximately
5 minutes.
All right.
I will pause for 48
Richard participants to be
all right.
We are back in open session at the executive session
to discuss the personnel matter.
We discussed
the merit leave bonus for the executive director,
and I believe that
a commissioner will have a motion as to what to adopt.
Yeah, I'll make their version of the award
throughout 36 days.
I hope
that in the
any further discussion
hearing none of the are in favor
of adopting a six day merit leave bonus for the executive
director of the CIA is and I want
all of those same name or if am
any abstentions
and the motion carries when congratulations.
Thank you very much.
I know that a lot of blood has spilled this year
and to have you all stuck listening saying this
because
metaphor. Right, exactly.
Metaphorically of the actual blood is good
if your assistance into some sort of Canada measure.
All right.
So where are we?
Do you have to go down DWI or not?
The annual wage increase.
okay.
All right.
I didn't see that.
That's not on my very
didn't see that in the materials.
You'll see these things that our department, they
generally deferred to them.
All right. It's not something I like.
You have to say. I'm the least.
I think DWI is only granted.
At least doing
the basic.
So I think that's just a formality.
But if you gave me six days,
I think I can say, like I think you would
logically single prove that maybe have wrong.
Well, in an abundance of clarity, I don't mind
taking a vote on whether, you know,
you're entitled to the MWI, you know, standard way other.
It's like basically that possibility, right?
They call. Yes.
Recommended it for other conditions.
I seen it done this year, so it could be
up to take just to make sure.
No question about that.
Okay.
Is there a is there a motion
to endorse DWI increase for the executive director?
I'll make that motion seconded.
Any further discussion
here? None.
All in favor of the increase if necessary.
That we voted on that for the executive director.
Please say I everything and
I thank you.
Any opposition, state name or anything in
any abstentions welcome carries
our final of
maybe a record number of action items.
Is the election of a 2026 Commission Chair.
The agenda says that we are to elect the vice chair,
but given that we don't have
a full complement of commissioners today
and I haven't had an opportunity
to speak to any commissioner
about to gauge interest
in serving as vice chair,
I think we should hold the vice chair
for the January meeting,
but in the tradition of the Commission,
the Vice Chair does become the chair
at the end of the one year term.
I understand, John, and is as vice chair
interested in
stepping into the chair role
and I certainly would support that
if others are interested or of any discussion or.
Jonathan, do you want to say a few words?
I don't have the floor on this
hearing.
Nothing from the other commissioners.
I just thought maybe when I make the chair
of the commission
for the leadership of the last year, I'm
still relatively new to the Commission.
So it's been
great to so worried for me and watch me
with the professionalism and we've got a great
staff is so excited for the next year.
We will see you as a chair and I hope to meet the high bar
that just like for us.
Thanks for your kind words and congratulations.
I guess that's an anticipatory congratulations, but
we've really cleared the field for you. So
is there a motion to elect
Vice Chair Sherman as next year 2012?
That's Commission chair.
I'll make that motion
seconded
by. Seconded.
Any further discussion
here, Amy?
All in favor of
electing the vice chair firm or the chair for 2026?
Please say I heard your answer.
I of all days to be.
But that's that's very
that's very big and humble.
Any any stand
any opposition you give even vote against
to stop and be safe.
But maybe that's that's too much reality
for us to bear any abstentions.
So Jonathan, you're abstaining,
Right?
Okay.
So four votes in favor, one abstention.
The motion carries basically, the chairman will be chair
starting January 1st,
and that's deletions.
Congratulations.
And that brings us to
the democracy voucher program report on Monday.
We are just about wrapped up this year.
I think I have one more
bit of funding to release to campaign.
And so hopefully that'll be
the end of this year.
So we are continuously planning for 2026.
We've done our work for about a years
and in the mix we did receive
a number of responses to our request for proposals.
So maybe we got
40, we got 14
responses for our 2026
retirement view, which is amazing.
And so we're in the process of reviewing those on.
Additionally, we're in the process of reviewing
the RFP and are closing out at this time and will produce
the final report of this year's outreach activities.
When we produce the what is now
an annual report of the last couple of years.
And we'll have that done within a couple,
the early spring, spring.
And so everything is just a
any two questions about this,
the summary of this year's activities.
Like I said, we're still a little bit in it.
So it's it's not
I'm interested in why
so many responses,
the RFP in an event that is just one district
and I think that's not surprising. Right.
But it is a lot
I don't know.
Something just said something about District
five is really getting people going.
It's I guess everyone wants to help out.
Maybe it was hard to to the commission meeting for
this wasn't a big discussion we had about that next year.
So I don't know,
maybe it's just catching on.
The district by special election
has really got a launch in the stratosphere.
Okay, we'll see. We'll see.
From your lips to God's ears or me.
Thank you.
Any other questions or comments, Bernie?
All right, let's turn it to the final executive
director report of the airplane.
Read it, said a couple of things to mention.
The Board of Commissioners
appreciation event is this Friday.
I believe there's still time to RSVP.
If any of you are still interested in attending.
So that's the first night ladies room at 4 p.m.
in City Hall. I'll let you know that
I did share with Madeline Wilson's new chief of staff
of the news of your pending just departure, Mr.
Haws.
And you as well, Commissioner Michaelis.
I asked her to get to work and find his commissioners.
She has her plate tremendously for right now,
so I expect I'll be reaching out again in the coming weeks
as well as to their general counsel.
What's that person's name?
So if I am on that
City Council presidency is still unsettled
so that I can really reach out to council for your renewal.
Mr.. Mr.. SHERMAN. Chair. Sure.
And to replace
Richard Short
until I know who the Council President is going to be.
So that's I will hear from the Commissioner.
I have a question.
I. Do you would you mind sending over the name
or contact information?
You have easy access to it
for Mayor elect Boston's chief of staff.
So I can follow up with a formal
letter of resignation.
I will.
Thank you.
I will also meet with new D two council member,
any of them today and House member elect Foster
on my plans in the works
to meet with the new city attorney Eric Evans.
I also met briefly with the new mayor elect, David Wilson.
So yes, I'm
doing all the outreach with a normal email,
letting me know we're not murderers
we're not terrible people.
We're just here to help them.
I believe they'll believe me.
So that's good.
I see you keep the bloodletting for
us, but
I think we should have up.
But I'm flying to Atlanta on Saturday
for the Cobo Conference, so that's coming up On their
first day in the public financing roundtable.
And I'm not going to be postponing a panel on
different models of public
financing and the pros and cons.
I will be lobbying on our experiences.
The voucher program.
I know that surprises you, although
we've been just really proud of the program.
It's really working very well,
You know, whether the governing outcomes
are what we want, that remains to be seen.
But I think the committee's working very well
and doing what it's intended to do,
which is really shake up the city government.
And that's how you reward.
All right.
When, you know, the Seahawks are playing
the Falcons at Atlanta on Sunday.
they are.
All right. Maybe I'll step out of
Goodman, but
I wouldn't advise that to be big.
I didn't reveal myself
as an outlier without feeling good this year. No,
I know you're not
all right, So maybe I'll get tickets to this.
I don't think there are cheap tickets to be out before for.
No, Michael, thanks. W
well, are your question, Commissioner Carlson,
has are you planning to get the January Commission?
This will not be your final meeting when
I will be the commissioner
on believe it's moving out of state so personally
and I'm not giving until the end of 24.
I do plan to to that.
Yes, great.
And I'll send out something soon about the January
meeting, just ensuring you're all available
on January seven, just since we're down to five now or six.
So just to make sure all
right,
Thank you all.
The meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.