Connect with us

Finance

Sharon Meieran’s Plan for Multnomah County Raises Campaign Finance Questions

Published

on

Sharon Meieran’s Plan for Multnomah County Raises Campaign Finance Questions

Former Multnomah County Commissioner Sharon Meieran left the government in 2024 frustrated by what she describes as widespread dysfunction. So she set to work on a highly detailed plan to restructure the county, one she hoped would be of great value to the next county chair.

But since Meieran entered the chair’s race June 9, she has argued that the plan actually has no value at all—at least not any that she needs to disclose in campaign finance records.

In fact, campaign filings show that a political action committee Meieran created last October spent $70,000 writing and publicizing the plan, using contributions largely from business owners and property developers frustrated with the county’s performance. That committee, Fixing Multnomah County, and a corresponding website centered on the plan feature photos of Meieran and links to her campaign website.

But Meieran has opted not to declare the plan as an in-kind contribution to her campaign, even as some argue that local and state campaign finance rules suggest she should. (Like other candidates, Meieran has a separate committee, Friends of Sharon Meieran, to finance her campaign.)

Advertisement

In an email, Meieran told WW she doesn’t need to report the plan as a campaign expense because it is available to any candidate—including her opponents, Multnomah County Commissioners Julia Brim-Edwards and Shannon Singleton.

“All information I gathered was (and is) publicly available,” Meieran wrote. “Anyone could have adopted (and still could use) the plan, including current board members, the current chair, and the current candidates. I did not write the plan to run for chair, but because it was obvious to me and others that the county needed a plan.”

Multnomah County places strict limits on campaign contributions, including in-kind contributions, which are contributions that have value but are not cash.

In the eyes of some observers, such as those backing Meieran’s opponents in the fierce three-way contest as well as neutral watchdogs, Meieran effectively sidestepped the county’s low ceiling on campaign contributions by taking tens of thousands of dollars from a handful of donors to craft a platform she’s now using in her bid for office. In other words, as a candidate, she is using something of value well in excess of contribution limits—and failing to report it.

The Oregon Campaign Finance Manual defines an in-kind contribution by its fair market value, or the dollar amount a consumer would expect to pay for the good or service.

Advertisement

Seth Woolley, a campaign finance watchdog, says because the plan written for Fixing Multnomah County was funded by a third-party political committee and with money from several donors, “contributing the report back to her own campaign is fully subject to limits and would be ‘fair market valued’ based on the amount the committee paid to generate the report.”

“The report is a thing of value created by a political committee. It meets the definition of a contribution as another thing of value that is categorized as an in-kind contribution,” Woolley adds. “So she’s in effective noncompliance as she has not reported it yet on both accounts and furthermore claims it is nonreportable.”


Elected to her first term as commissioner in 2016 and her second in 2020, Meieran, an emergency room physician who also has a law degree, ran against Jessica Vega Pederson for Multnomah County chair in 2022 (WW endorsed Meieran in that race). After losing, she completed a fiery second term as commissioner, sparring with Vega Pederson at nearly every opportunity. As a thorn in Vega Pederson’s side, Meieran won many fans.

“When I left the county, many people expressed sadness that I was leaving, [and] described me as the only ‘voice of reason’ on the board,” she says.

In October 2025, Meieran founded a miscellaneous political action committee called Fixing Multnomah County. That committee raised $70,116 and built a 23-page “Comprehensive Multnomah County Turnaround Plan” that Meieran now says she will enact if elected.

Advertisement

The plan advises how to make the county more efficient and improve transparency. It ties dollars to outcomes, asking that instead of setting budgets for programs that continue year after year, county departments should outline the results they expect funding to deliver—and be held responsible for achieving those results. The plan also looks to streamline the county’s 11 departments into five hubs to eliminate duplication of services and better track how money flows through the county. (The plan zeroes in on homeless services as its case study in how these budgeting principles would play out).

Meieran says developing the plan was not a stepping stone to her bid for county chair. She decided to enter the chair’s race, she says, to force the county to engage with a plan, any plan.

“I did not originally want to run for chair,” she says. “The only reason I am running is because no other candidate has proposed even an outline of a plan…Had any of the other candidates made constructive positive or negative comments about the plan, or shared one of their own, I would have happily considered that success my final contribution to the county.”

The debate now boils down to whether Meieran should have reported the $70,000 spent to develop the plan, now core to her platform, as a campaign expense, and whether that money should be allowed in the race as an in-kind contribution.

Contributions to county candidates are limited to $603 per donor this election cycle thanks to a charter amendment voters approved in 2016.

Advertisement

Yet Fixing Multnomah County acquired much of its bankroll from donations that far exceeded $603.

Those contributions included $10,000 from developer Homer Williams, $10,000 from former City Commissioner Amanda Fritz, $5,000 from affordable housing developer Rob Justus, $5,000 from former Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission chairman Paul Rosenbaum, and $2,500 from downtown property owner Greg Goodman.

Laurie Wimmer, executive secretary-treasurer of the Northwest Oregon Labor Council, says Fixing Multnomah County’s collection of “way larger than allowed” contributions allows Meieran to skirt campaign finance laws. Wimmer’s group has endorsed Brim-Edwards for chair. (Meieran is not seeking organizations’ endorsements.)

“Even if this doesn’t strictly violate the letter of the law, it surely violates its spirit,” Wimmer says. “As long as we, as a community, have decided that limits are good public policy, then everyone should follow them with fidelity and not game the system for some kind of advantage.”

Jessica Morkert-Shibley, a spokeswoman for Multnomah County, says a political committee’s contributions to any candidate are subject to the $603 limit. The definition of the limit is broad enough to extend to in-kind contributions, Morkert-Shibley says, but she declined to comment on Meieran’s campaign bookkeeping.

Advertisement

“The county would not comment on a particular candidate or campaign outside the context of a formal complaint or investigation without an opportunity to gather all the information,” she says. “We wouldn’t want to prejudge a matter before it’s been reviewed. And at this time we do not have enough additional information to initiate an investigation without a formal complaint.”

Meieran, for her part, says that if someone had a substantive issue with her two committees, she would have been made aware of a complaint. None has been filed with the county, Morkert-Shibley says. And Meieran says she’s acting within the law, having sought legal advice from C&E Systems, which provides management services.

When asked if she believed the plan Fixing Multnomah County developed provided value to her campaign, Meieran said it was “immaterial from a disclosure perspective.”

And Meieran took issue with WW’s suggestion that not reporting the plan as a campaign expense violated campaign finance laws’ spirit of transparency.

“The question should not be: How the hell does Sharon Meieran have a plan to talk about in her campaign?” she says. “It should be: Why is she the only one who cared enough to spend a year figuring out what needs to happen after an election before even deciding to be a candidate?”

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

Are software stocks still in the crosshairs after AI warnings shake tech?

Published

on

Are software stocks still in the crosshairs after AI warnings shake tech?

Yahoo Finance Senior Business Reporter Ines Ferre and Zacks Investment Management chief market strategist Brian Mulberry analyze the moves in semiconductor and software stocks after recent warnings about AI’s rapid development shook markets on Monday.

Continue Reading

Finance

10th Joint RFA Research Seminar Calls for Stronger Cooperation on Digital Finance in a Geo-Fragmented World – ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office – AMRO ASIAASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office – AMRO ASIA

Published

on

10th Joint RFA Research Seminar Calls for Stronger Cooperation on Digital Finance in a Geo-Fragmented World – ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office – AMRO ASIAASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office – AMRO ASIA

SINGAPORE, SEPTEMBER 15, 2026 – The 10th Joint Regional Financing Arrangements (RFAs) Research Seminar concluded today in Singapore, bringing together more than 150 participants from across the globe, including heads of institutions, policymakers, academics, and experts. The seminar examined how rapid financial digitalization is reshaping money, payments, and global financial system; the implications for financial stability and policy formulation; and the evolving role of regional and global financial safety nets.

Held on September 14–15 in a hybrid format, the seminar was jointly organized by AMRO, the Arab Monetary Fund (AMF), the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), and the Latin American Reserve Fund (FLAR). Discussions focused on the opportunities and risks arising from stablecoins, tokenized deposits, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and emerging cross-border payment systems against a backdrop of growing geoeconomic fragmentation.

AMRO Director/CEO Yasuto Watanabe opened the seminar, emphasizing a shared commitment to exchanging experiences and enriching dialogue to strengthen cooperation among RFA institutions,  as well as deepen understanding of the opportunities and challenges arising from financial digitalization. Will Cong, President’s Chair Professor of Finance, Computing and Data Science and Associate Dean of Nanyang Business School, delivered the keynote address on innovation, competition, and stability in an increasingly tokenized financial system.

The first session, chaired by AMRO Chief Economist Dong He, examined the transformation of money and payments, including fast payment systems in Latin America, cross-border payment connectivity in ASEAN+3, the tokenization of real-world assets in the Arab region, and the evolution of digital finance in Europe. Participants noted that greater interoperability could make cross-border transactions faster, more affordable, and more accessible, while fragmented technical and regulatory standards could introduce new operational and financial integrity risks.

Advertisement

The second session, chaired by FLAR Chief Economist Carlos Giraldo, explored the implications of CBDCs and stablecoins for monetary policy and central bank balance sheets. Participants discussed how different forms of digital money could coexist while preserving central bank money as an anchor of trust. They also considered how CBDC design and stablecoin regulation could affect competition, privacy, monetary sovereignty, and the transmission of monetary policy.

The third session, chaired by AMF Executive Director for Capacity Development and Innovation Department, Dr. Sofiene Gaaloul, focused on financial stability in a digital monetary system. Participants examined how the speed and ease of digital transactions could intensify runs during periods of stress and create new channels of contagion between the traditional financial system and the digital asset ecosystem. Authorities will therefore need to strengthen monitoring, clarify regulatory responsibilities, and ensure that crisis-management and liquidity frameworks keep pace with innovation.

The seminar concluded with a policy roundtable on digital finance, trade, and growth in a geoeconomically fragmented world, chaired by ESM Secretary General Nicola Giammarioli. The discussion highlighted digital finance as a key driver of growth, trade integration, and financial inclusion, particularly through more efficient cross-border payments. Panelists also stressed that geopolitical fragmentation could lead to competing payment systems and standards, which could undermine global financial connectivity. They underlined that interoperability, resilience, and international cooperation will be essential to harness innovation while safeguarding an open and integrated financial system.

For RFAs, these developments have direct implications for economic surveillance, crisis prevention, and financial assistance. A deeper understanding of emerging digital channels and vulnerabilities will enable RFAs to better assess risks and contribute to a more responsive and well-coordinated Global Financial Safety Net.

Held annually since 2017, the Joint RFA Research Seminar provides a platform for RFAs, central banks, finance ministries, international financial institutions, and academics to exchange research and policy perspectives on global and regional financial stability.

Advertisement

The RFAs will next convene at the 11th High-Level RFA Dialogue, to be held alongside the IMF–World Bank Annual Meetings in Bangkok, Thailand in October 2026.

 

About AMRO

AMRO is an international organization established to support macroeconomic resilience and financial stability of the ASEAN+3 region, comprising members of the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) and China; Hong Kong, China; Japan; and Korea. AMRO’s mandate is to conduct macroeconomic surveillance, support regional financial arrangements, and provide technical assistance to the members. AMRO also serves as a regional knowledge hub and provides support to ASEAN+3 financial cooperation.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Finance

Compliance Corner: New Jersey 2027 Campaign-Finance Limits – Insider NJ

Published

on

Compliance Corner: New Jersey 2027 Campaign-Finance Limits – Insider NJ

By Avi D. Kellin and Julia Pudimott

Under the Elections Transparency Act, which was enacted in April 2023, contribution limits for all candidates and committees are subject to inflation adjustments in odd-numbered years. The 2027 inflation adjustment is set to go into effect on January 1, 2027.

What this means is that, starting January 1, contribution limits for essentially all New Jersey state and local candidates and committees will go up. The following chart summarizes the new limits that apply to contributions made from individuals, corporations, unions, associations, candidate committees, and political committees:

ENTITY TYPE 2026 LIMITS 2027 LIMITS
Candidate Committee $5,500 per election $5,800 per election
$17,300 per election from candidate committees and political committees $18,300 per election from candidate committees and political committees
Political Committee $15,200 per election $16,100 per election
Continuing Political Committee $15,200 per year $16,100 per year
State Party Committee $79,000 per year $84,000 per year
$39,500 per year to housekeeping account $42,000 per year to housekeeping account
County Party Committee $79,000 per year $84,000 per year
$39,500 per year to housekeeping account $42,000 per year to housekeeping account
Municipal Party Committee $15,200 per year $16,100 per year
Independent Expenditure Committee NO LIMITS NO LIMITS

 

Advertisement

Political party committees, PACs (CPCs), and legislative leadership committees that follow the calendar year as the reporting period will simply have a higher limit on January 1, 2027, when each contributor’s limits re-set to $0 for the new calendar year. For political party committees with housekeeping accounts, those housekeeping accounts may in 2027 accept additional contributions of $42,000 per calendar year, an increase from the current level of $39,500 (by law, the limit for a housekeeping account is half of the limit for the general account).

For candidates, whose limits apply on a per-election basis, the increase will apply to the next election. For example, an Assembly candidate who is running in the 2027 primary will be able to accept an additional $300 from a contributor who had maxed out in 2026 once the increase goes into effect on January 1. (This means that candidates running in the 2027 primary election will be able to again solicit from all contributors to reach the new maximum.) Then the new $5,800 limit will be in place from the start of the 2027 general election.

In addition, ELEC is applying inflation adjustments to 24/72-hour reporting and independent-expenditure reporting for spenders using their own funds (in 2027, the threshold will increase from $300 to $400 for both categories).

The new limits that will be in place in a few months highlight the importance for each individual, business, union, and political organization to keep accurate and complete records of their political contributions. Understanding election cycles, contribution dates, and now biennial shifts in contribution limits will make the difference between a legally permissible political contribution and one that exceeds legal limits.

Compliance Tip: Even though the general campaign-finance limits are increasing in January, these adjustments do NOT apply to the contribution reporting threshold of $200 per reporting period. This means that contributors who wish to stay under the reportable threshold—which necessitates reporting of detailed contributor information on a recipient’s campaign-finance reports—must stay at $200 or less per election for a candidate and $200 or less per calendar year for a political party committee, PAC (CPC), or legislative leadership committee.

Advertisement

Avi D. Kelin is a partner of PEM Law LLP, and chairs the firm’s Political Law and Non-Profit Law practices. He helps businesses, organizations, individuals, and political organizations to influence policy while complying with the law.

Julia Pudimott is an associate at PEM Law LLP. She focuses her practice on commercial litigation, election law, and political law.

This column is for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended and should not be construed as legal advice. It is recommended that readers not rely on this column, but that professional advice be sought for individual matters.

 

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending