Connect with us

Finance

Oregon Legislature passes controversial campaign finance changes

Published

on

Oregon Legislature passes controversial campaign finance changes
play

Legislators passed a bill March 5 to modify forthcoming changes to Oregon’s campaign finance system despite outcry from good government groups who say the bill creates new loopholes.

Those groups were key in creating House Bill 4024, which was created and passed in 2024 in place of warring ballot measures seeking to overhaul the system.

That legislation included new limits on contributions, including capping individual spending on statewide candidates each cycle at $3,300, and other changes. Parts of the bill were set to go into effect in 2027 and 2028.

Advertisement

Under the new proposal, House Bill 4018, the limits would still begin in 2027, but disclosure requirements and penalties would be pushed to 2031. It also gives the Secretary of State money to update the campaign finance system, but far less than the office previously thought it might need.

Representatives voted 39-19 to pass the bill. A few hours later, the Senate passed it 20-9.

Fourteen of the “no” votes in the House were Democrats, including Reps. Tom Andersen, D-Salem, and Lesly Muñoz, D-Woodburn.

Muñoz told the Statesman Journal she voted against the bill after hearing from people upset with the bill’s process.

Advertisement

Six Democratic senators cast a “no” vote on HB 4018.

Oregon campaign finance reform advocates say they were left out of negotiations

After working together in 2024, advocates said Speaker of the House Julie Fahey, D-Eugene, “ghosted” them.

Good government groups said the bill does far more than address necessary technical fixes to HB 4024.

HB 4018 is “a complete betrayal of the deal that was made two years ago,” Norman Turrill of Oregon’s League of Women Voters said.

Advertisement

Should the bill be signed by Gov. Tina Kotek, the groups said they will push their own changes through a 2028 ballot initiative.

Those advocates have outlined at least 11 different changes they believe the bill creates. The bill’s contents were first shared through a Feb. 9 amendment that was posted after 5 p.m., hours before it received a public hearing in an 8 a.m. work session on Feb. 10 and later, Feb. 12.

Secretary of State Tobias Read told legislators in January his office was requesting $25 million as a placeholder to fund a new campaign finance system for the state. Read was not secretary of state when House Bill 2024 was passed and his office is now working to implement the bill’s changes on a fast approaching deadline.

An additional amendment to the bill instead gives the Secretary of State’s Office $1.5 million for staff, some of whom would be tasked with updating the state’s current system.

House members agreed March 4 to send the bill back to committee, presumably to be amended. A 5 p.m. committee meeting was canceled about an hour after initially being announced.

Advertisement

A work session on HB 4018 was moved to the next morning. After an hour of delay, legislators convened and finished the meeting, moving the bill back to the floor without any changes, in less than three minutes.

A new campaign finance bill, Senate Bill 1502, was introduced and scheduled for a public hearing and work session March 4.

The bill is “very simple,” Senate Minority Leader Bruce Starr, R-Dundee, said. It tells the Secretary of State’s Office to draft a bill for the 2027 session with necessary campaign finance improvements from HB 4024 and HB 4018.

Three senators voted against the bill March 5. It now moves to the House. Legislators have a March 8 deadline to end the session.

“SB 1502 would not correct the severe damage to campaign finance reform that will occur, if HB 4018 B is enacted in this session,” Dan Meek of Honest Elections Oregon wrote in submitted testimony.

Advertisement

Lawmakers appear unsatisfied, but supportive, toward Oregon campaign finance bill

House Majority Leader Ben Bowman, D-Tigard, said HB 4018 made positive changes but acknowledged it was “a challenging vote for many of us.”

“We are implementing this whole new system that is new for all of us, and there are a lot of opinions and there are a lot of details to figure out,” House Minority Leader Lucetta Elmer, R-McMinnville, said. Elmer and Bowman carried the bill in the House. “With that being said, we’re moving forward in good faith, knowing that we’ll also be coming back next year to make sure that those details and all those kinks are worked out.”

Rep. Mark Gamba, D-Milwaukie, said he was concerned about the bill and the “non-inclusive process” that led to it.

Gamba pointed to a letter from the Washington, D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center that states in part that the bill “would substantially revise critical campaign finance reforms enacted two years ago in Oregon” and weaken the state’s campaign finance law.

The current bill is not the only possibility for moving forward, Sen. Jeff Golden, D-Ashland, told lawmakers. Proposed amendments that would have extended implementation timelines without the additional changes were ignored, he said.

Advertisement

“House Bill 4024 and this bill, 4018, have two things in common. One, they were thrown together in a few days behind closed doors, mostly by organizations who dominate campaign funding in the current system,” Golden said. “And two, very few legislators understand what is actually in these bills.”

He urged lawmakers to abandon the system created in House Bill 4024 as an “uncomfortably expensive learning experience” and develop a new plan based on successful programs in other states.

Sen. Sara Gelser Blouin, D-Corvallis, also spoke against the bill on the Senate floor.

“The concern that I had and that my constituents had was technical changes are one thing, but it should not be increasing the amount of money that candidates can take in or hold or carry over,” Gelser Blouin said. “Unfortunately, as it’s drafted, this bill does all of those things.”

HB 4024 is too complicated and “unimplementable” without the fixes in HB 4018, Starr said.

Advertisement

Sen. Lew Frederick, D-Portland, agreed, saying HB 4018 and SB 1502 give reassurance about a system he has concerns about.

“If there were no cameras and the lights were off, I think most people would agree this is not the bill we want,” Rep. Paul Evans, D-Monmouth, said.

Some lawmakers expressed similar feelings of discontentment with the bill in Ways and Means and one of its subcommittees on March 3, but said they felt it was important to make some progress on the issue. Discussions could happen again in 2027, they said.

Rep. Nancy Nathanson, D-Eugene, who ultimately voted in favor of the bill, said March 3 supporting it “is a very painful choice to make.”

Statesman Journal reporter Dianne Lugo contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Anastasia Mason covers state government for the Statesman Journal. Reach her at acmason@statesmanjournal.com or 971-208-5615.

Finance

UK Film & TV Fund Allegro Finance Secures $2.6M Working Capital Facility

Published

on

UK Film & TV Fund Allegro Finance Secures .6M Working Capital Facility

London-based film and TV lending platform Allegro Finance has secured a £2 million ($2.6M) working capital facility from Beechbrook Capital, through funds managed on behalf of the British Business Bank.

The announcement of the facility follows Allegro Finance’s official launch last week of a $500 million credit facility dedicated to film and television production, with entities advised by Elliott Advisors UK Limited.

More from Deadline

Allegro was launched in 2024 by film and TV finance, structured credit and investment banking veterans Jamie Lowe, Peter Touche and Sam Collett.

“This working capital facility is a powerful catalyst for Allegro’s growth and we are grateful for the support from Beechbrook and the funds they manage on behalf of the British Business Bank,” said Collett.

Advertisement

“It enables us to scale the platform and deploy private institutional capital into the UK film and television sector at a level not previously seen. This is precisely how public capital can unlock private investment, support high-growth businesses and strengthen one of the UK’s most globally competitive industries.”

Allegro’s funding line will be deployed across a diversified international slate of film and television productions in line with Allegro’s ambition to become the leading non-bank senior lender to the global screen industries.

Paul Shea, Managing Partner of small and medium-sized businesses lender specialist Beechbrook Capital, said the creation investment was good fit for the funds the company manages on behalf of the British Business Bank.

“All our funds seek to support growth and job creation, and this investment is no different. The UK’s creative industries are a vital part of the economy, employing hundreds of thousands of people and driving significant cultural and economic value,” said Shea.

British Business Bank Managing Director and Co-Head of Funds Adam Kelly pointed to the fact that creative industries are a key part of the UK’s industrial strategy.

Advertisement

“The UK’s creative industries play a vital role in the government’s Industrial Strategy, employing 2.4 million people and contributing £124bn of Gross Value Added to the economy. By providing finance to Beechbrook Capital, and in turn supporting specialist platforms like Allegro Finance, we support businesses to access the finance they need to start, scale and stay in the UK,” he said.

Continue Reading

Finance

Hampshire College fights for accreditation amid financial concerns

Published

on

Hampshire College fights for accreditation amid financial concerns

AMHERST, Mass. (WWLP) – Hampshire College is at risk of losing its accreditation following recent action by the New England Commission of Higher Education.

The college must now prove it meets the commission’s standards to maintain its standing. In a letter issued last week, the commission stated it took action against the college at the beginning of the month.

The oversight body indicated that it has reason to believe the school is no longer meeting essential standards, including the ability to organize the resources necessary to achieve its educational purposes.

Several specific factors contributed to the commission’s decision to take action against the school. The oversight body cited the institution’s inability to successfully sustain enrollment growth as a primary concern. Additionally, a planned financial move involving the sale of the Atkins parcel of land fell through.

The college also faces significant financial hurdles regarding its long-term debt and savings. Documents indicate the school has been unable to refinance its $21 million bond debt. Meanwhile, the college’s unrestricted endowment has continued to decline.

Advertisement

Leadership at Hampshire College addressed the commission’s findings in a joint letter. The Hampshire College President Jennifer Chrisler noted that the administration has a long history of cooperation with oversight agencies.

“Throughout Hampshire’s history, leadership has worked productively with our accreditors to plan for, provide and assess our distinctive, student-driven educational model,” Chrisler stated.

The chair of the board of trustees also responded to the commission’s focus on the school’s fiscal health. Chair Jose Fuentes emphasized that the board is actively working to resolve the college’s liabilities. “Ongoing financial viability is the board’s top priority. To that end, we are focused on refinancing the college’s debt,” Fuentes said.

Despite the current review, Hampshire College will maintain its accreditation for the time being. This allows the institution to remain eligible for federal funding, ensuring that students can still receive federal financial aid while the process continues.

Hampshire College is required to present its case for maintaining its status at the commission’s June meeting. The school must demonstrate why its accreditation should not be revoked at that time.

Advertisement

Local News Headlines