Campaign Spending Commission

Draft

Campaign Spending Commission Meeting
Zoom Video Conference
November 13, 2024
10:00 a.m.

Commissioners Present
Neal Herbert, David Chee, Jon Itomura, Danton Wong, Barbara Polk

Staff Present
Kristin E. Izumi-Nitao, Tony Baldomero, Gary Kam, Terence Lau, Anthony Diep 

Deputy Attorney General
Candace Park

Guest(s)
None

Call to Order
Chair Herbert called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m.

Chair Herbert went over the procedures for the remote meeting via Zoom and introduced the Commissioners, Commission staff, and the Deputy Attorney General who were present.  Except for Commissioner Itomura, who stated that a staff member was present in the room with him, the Commissioners present stated that there was no one else with them.

Consideration and Approval of Minutes of Meeting on 10/16/24
Vice-Chair Chee moved to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 10/16/24.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Wong.  Motion carried (4-0) (Commissioner Polk abstained because she was not present at the 10/16/24 meeting).

New Business
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao stated that the following Conciliation Agreement on the agenda was a result of an investigation initiated by her as the Executive Director pursuant to HRS §11-314(7) to determine whether there had been a violation of the Hawaii campaign spending laws.  She stated that Respondent has been informed in a letter from Commission staff of the violation and has been notified of today’s meeting as well as received a copy of the proposed conciliation agreement.  She recommended that the Commission make a preliminary determination of probable cause that a violation had been committed, waive further proceedings, and approve each of the proposed agreements.

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 25-30 – In Re the Matter of David Alcos – Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the 2nd Preliminary General Report and requested that the Commission assess a reduced fine from $600 to $300 as it is Respondent’s second violation.  Chair Herbert asked if there were any comments or questions.

Vice-Chair Chee moved to approve the proposed conciliation agreement. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wong.  Motion carried (5-0).

*Report on the Commission’s 2024 Annual Online Survey – Associate Director Baldomero reported on the results of the Commission’s 2024 Annual Online Survey.  He stated that the purpose of the survey is to help evaluate the effectiveness of Commission operations and communications for fiscal year 2024 (i.e., July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024) as well as provide the Commission with any feedback in areas that we administer and regulate for improvement in fiscal year 2025 and beyond.  He made the following remarks:

• This was the 13th year of the survey.
• The survey was launched on 10/1/24 via the CSC website, E-Blast, Facebook & X, and closed on 10/28/24.
• Total outreach via E-Blast was 1,157 made up of 498 candidate committees, 261 noncandidate committees and 398 public subscribers.  CSC’s Facebook and X pages are in the public domain and at the time of the survey launch there were 320 Facebook and 1,112 Twitter followers.  There were also 5,441 visitors to the CSC website during the time the survey was open and available on the website.
• The survey ran for a total of 28 days which is below the 13-year average of 35 days.  The longest that the survey ran was for 51 days in 2017 resulting in 125 responses.
• There were 128 total responses which ranks tied for #8 for the 13 years that the Commission has been conducting the survey compared to the 13-year average of 119 responses (144 responses were received in 2020 (COVID year) which was the highest ever received with the second highest number of responses occurring in 2016 with 140).  94 or 73% of the 128 responders completed the survey to the end.
• 6 minutes was the typical time spent completing the survey with the CSC estimating it was going to take 5-10 minutes.
• E-Blasts were sent on 10/1/24, 10/10/24, 10/16/24, 10/23/24, and 10/28/24, and Facebook and X posts were done on the same dates.  The CSC website post remained on the website for the entire 28-day duration of the survey.
• The survey comprised of 6 sections and 28 survey questions (27 multiple-choice, 1 open-ended).

Associate Director Baldomero went through each of the 6 sections of the survey:

1 – Background Information Highlights (5 Questions/128 Responses) (Percentages calculated based on the number of answers to a specific question)

• Responders were mostly members of the public (44) then candidates (39) and treasurers of candidate committees (16) who reside on the islands of Oahu (72), Hawaii (27), and Maui (18). There were also 9 responses from interested members of a noncandidate committee not listed on the Organizational Report. The responders have a wide-range of experience among the 6 ranges with most falling in the less than 1 year range of experience (51), then the 10-20 years (24) and 5-10 years (22) ranges.  Overall, 51 responders have a less than 1 year relationship and 57 responders have a more than 5 years relationship with the Commission making this a diverse group of people that can provide us a fresh as well as an experienced perspective on our work.
• 77 or 60% filed CSC reports electronically, 66 or 52% made a contribution or a loan to a candidate, 65 or 51% have been involved in campaign activities, and 44 or 34% searched or conducted research and/or reported on Commission data, so this was an engaged group that was quite familiar with the world of campaigning and campaign finance.
• 91 or 71% responded that this was their first time taking the survey with 32 or 25% responding that they took the survey between 2-5 times so it seems that this is a group that will offer us a fresh look at what we do. Only 4 or 3% took the survey between 6-9 times.

2 – Communication/Access Highlights (8 Questions/111 Responses) (Percentages calculated based on the number of answers to a specific question)

• 87 or 78% of responders in this category responded that the Commission’s website was the #1 source for obtaining information from the Commission followed by phone calls or drop-in visits to the Commission’s office (72 or 65%), Email (59 or 53%), and then the Guidebooks and Manuals (57 or 51%).
• Social-media engagement is still lacking with only 8 or 7% following us on X, 6 or 5% following us on Facebook, and 7 or 6% just viewing our X posts on the CSC website, compared to 94 or 85% who are not.  Despite that, 75 or 68% were email subscribers who received E-Blasts (i.e., so most of the responders came from our E-Blast outreach and the CSC website versus Facebook and X posts).
• Electronically filing disclosure reports (70 or 63%) and viewing candidate committee reports (58 or 52%), followed by accessing campaign finance laws and rules (55 or 50%) as well as viewing committee reporting schedules (53 or 48%), drove people to the CSC website. Overall, it seems that responders are visiting our website to electronically file reports and to view candidate committee reports. Responders are also accessing resources to educate themselves on the campaign spending law and using our searchable database (52 or 27%) to view our data.
• Of the 62 or 56% who said that they use the searchable database, 59 or 96% said it was a helpful tool that was mainly used to search contributor names and how much money they gave to candidates (50 or 86%) and how candidates spent/expended their campaign funds (40 or 69%).
• The candidate and noncandidate committee data visualization apps were not as popular as the searchable database with 24 or 22% who said they had used it and 87 or 78% saying they had not.

3 – Education/Training Highlights (2 Questions/110 Responses) (Percentages calculated based on the number of answers to a specific question)

• For those who attended training, most of them said that it had been more than 3 years ago (18 or 16%) or 1-3 years (10 or 9%) since they last attended an in-person or remote (zoom) training. 60 or 55% have never attended in-person or remote (zoom) training before.
• 49 or 45% have viewed the Candidate Committee Guidebook, 45 or 41% viewed the Candidate Filing System Manual, and 37 or 34% viewed the Treasurer’s Guidebook, and so it seems that this was the preferable way of obtaining information on the requirements.

4 – Compliance and Enforcement Highlights (5 Questions/105 Responses) (Percentages calculated based on the number of answers to a specific question)

• 46 or 44% of responders in this category said they file their disclosure reports on time and 29 or 28% said they have not with 27 or 90% of those saying they only filed late 1-2 times.
• 38 or 36% of responders said they were fined 1-2 times with 1 or 1% saying they were fined 3-5 times, and another 1 or 1% saying they were fined 5 or more times. 34 or 32% said they were never fined.
• 19 or 18% have entered into a Conciliation Agreement with the Commission but 49 or 47% have never entered into a Conciliation Agreement with the Commission.
• 63 or 60% have never had a complaint filed against them with 9 or 9% saying they had a complaint brought before the Commission against them.

5 – Public Funding Highlights (3 Questions/104 Responses) (Percentages calculated based on the number of answers to a specific question)

• Only a small number of responders in this category (7 or 7%) have qualified for and received public funding versus 58 or 56% who have not. Of the 7 receiving public funds, 5 or 38% received the maximum amount.
• 71 or 68% support public funding versus 33 or 32% who do not.

6 – Other Highlights (5 Questions/99 Responses) (Percentages calculated based on the number of answers to a specific question)

• 63 or 64% of responders in this category said they would support a general fund appropriation to see public funding continue versus 36 or 36% who said they would not. 42 or 42% have been checking off the $3 tax check-off versus 57 or 58% who have not.
• 84 or 85% knew that the $3 check-off did not affect their tax liability or decrease their refund versus 15 or 15% who did not. It seems that the responders are aware that checking off the box does not affect their tax liability or decrease their refund, but they are still not checking the box.
• 75 or 76% responded that Super PACs were a concern versus 24 or 24% who said they were not a concern. This high percentage of concern is typical in an election year when there is an increase in Super PAC spending.

7 – Comments (34 Responses)

• Many positive comments acknowledging staff’s great work and the helpful resources we provide to our filers and the public.
• These are the most constructive comments for improvement: 1) Standardize names in searchable database; 2) Increase field size in electronic filing system; 3) Accept simple questions via email; 4) Customize E-Blast system; and 5) Review fine schedule.

Associate Director Baldomero asked if there were any questions.  There were none.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao commented that there is a lot of interest in public funding based on the survey results and previous legislative sessions, however, there is still hesitation for people to check the $3 tax check-off when submitting taxes.  The lack of funding is always a topic of discussion in administering the partial or full public funding program.  She also stated that the survey results will be posted on the Commission’s website.

Old Business
None

Report from Executive Director
*Report on Compliance of Filing Timely Disclosure Reports – Executive Director Izumi-Nitao noted that there are a number of reporting deadlines coming up.  They include:

• Final Election Period Report (due 11/27/24) (covering 8/11/24 or 10/22/24 to 11/5/24 for County of Kauai & Hawaii winning candidates)
  • 18 candidate committees
• Final Election Period Report (due 12/5/24) (covering 1/1/24 or 8/11/24 or 10/22/24 to 11/5/24)
  • 233 candidates committees
  • 263 noncandidate committees
• Expenditure of Public Funds Report (due 12/5/24) (covering 1/1/24 to 11/5/24 for candidates receiving public funds)
  • 4 candidates committees

As for reports that were due since the Commission’s last meeting in October, she stated that they included:

• 2nd Preliminary General Report (due 10/28/24) (covering 9/27/24 to 10/21/24)
  • 117 candidate committees needed to file
    • Filed on time – 111 (95%)
    • Failed to file – 5
    • Filed late – 1
    • Today – 0
  • 229 noncandidate committees needed to file
    • Filed on time – 219 (96%)
    • Failed to file – 9
    • Filed late – 1
    • Today – 1
  • Late Contributions/Expenditures Report (due 11/4/24) (covering 10/22/24 to 11/1/24)
  • Candidate committees
    • Filed – 69
  • Noncandidate committees
    • Filed – 34

She mentioned that there may be more committees that need to file this report depending on the final election report that is due on 11/27/24 or 12/5/24.

*Report and Update on the Certification of Elections Procedure – She stated that winning candidates need to be certified by the Commission that they have paid all of the fines issued to them and filed all required reports before they can be sworn into office by the Office of Elections or the county clerks.

Associate Director Baldomero stated that there are 103 winning candidates from this election and that the procedure to certify them are as follows:

• We will email Office of Elections every Friday by 4:30 p.m.; 2025 Legislature starts on 1/15/25
• Certification #1 – City & County of Honolulu winning candidates already went out on 10/24/24
• Schedule:
• Certification #2 (11/22/24)
• Certification #3 (11/29/24)
• (so forth up to Certification #7 (12/27/24))

*Report on 2024 Mahalo Message – Executive Director Izumi-Nitao stated that she will be sending out holiday greetings on behalf of the Commission to extend our gratitude and appreciation to the support we received from various agencies this past year and that is expected to be sent out by 12/16/24. 

Executive Session
*Consideration and Approval of Executive Session Minutes of Meeting on 10/16/24 – Chair Herbert asked if there were no corrections or amendments to the proposed executive session minutes on 10/16/24, he would ask for a motion in open session.

Vice-Chair Chee moved to approve the executive session minutes on 10/16/24.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Wong.  Motion carried (4-0) (Commissioners Polk abstained because she was not present at the 10/16/24 meeting).

Next Meeting:
Scheduled for Wednesday, December 18, 2024.

Vice-Chair Chee moved to adjourn the meeting.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Wong.  Motion carried (5-0).

Meeting Adjourned at 10:35 a.m.