Landslide vote to curb Tempe 'dark money' may send broader message to Arizona

Tempe voters by a 9-to-1 margin supported more transparency in political spending, which could send a message to leaders beyond the East Valley city.

Phoenix is considering a similar measure to curb "dark money" in city elections, but state lawmakers are pushing a bill that could throw a wrench into those plans.

House Bill 2153, approved by the state House of Representatives and awaiting action in the state Senate, would bar cities, counties and the state from requiring political non-profits to disclose their donors.

The bill comes as 91 percent of Tempe voters said "yes" to a city charter amendment to require such disclosures, according to early unofficial election results Tuesday.

"It would be a fool's errand to pass that bill," Tempe Councilwoman Lauren Kuby said Wednesday, noting the overwhelming support the city measure received.

Phoenix Councilwoman Kate Gallego congratulated Tempe on Twitter. "Phoenix is next!" she said.

'Cities lead the way'

"Dark-money" spending has not played an outsize role in Tempe politics. Independent expenditure groups spent $4,678 in 2014 and $3,862 in 2016 in Tempe elections, according to the city.

But Kuby has said that "cities lead the way" and reform "percolates upwards."

State leaders have so far maintained that political non-profits, often referred to as "dark money" because their donors can remain anonymous, do not have to reveal their funding sources in most cases.

Such groups are prohibited from coordinating with candidates, but the independent expenditures often go toward robo-calls, TV ads, mailings and other campaign tactics to help a political candidate, including by attacking opponents.

Tempe's charter amendment will require groups making independent expenditures of more than $1,000 in municipal elections to disclose details about the organization and its financial backers.

The city already has lowered the cap on individual campaign donations to city candidates and required city candidates to label donations that come from city lobbyists.

MORE: 'The tragedy of American politics': Follow the money in Tempe politics

SEE ALSO: Tempe election results roll in; incumbents show strong lead

"Tempeans are really concerned about the influence of money in politics," Kuby said.

The latest city charter amendment must be approved by Gov. Doug Ducey before it can take effect.

The governor could take his time. When Tempe voters lowered the cap on individual candidate donations in 2015, Ducey didn't sign off until 2017.

Ducey benefited from more than $8 million in spending by dark-money groups during his 2014 campaign for governor, according to The Arizona Republic's analysis in 2014.

Right to remain anonymous?

State Rep. Vince Leach, R-Tucson, who proposed HB 2153, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The bill, that could quash the Tempe measure, was approved in the House largely along party lines, with Democrats opposed.

The conservative Goldwater Institute, along with the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce and the East Valley Chamber of Commerce, support the bill to protect donors from disclosure.

In a House committee meeting on the bill, Timothy Sandefur, vice president for litigation at the Goldwater Institute, said the Tempe proposal is a way to "silence dissent."

The ability for individuals to anonymously donate to non-profits is akin to the secret ballot and it keeps them from being "reprimanded" for their political views, Sandefur said.

State Rep. Ken Clark, D-Phoenix, countered that there is "a compelling interest in trying to understand who is trying to influence our laws."

"You don't have a right to hide money in politics, period," he said.

Morgan Dick, with the Arizona Advocacy Network, quoted late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who said, "I do not look forward to a society which ... campaigns anonymously."

Cities v. state

Kuby has said that HB 2153, if passed, would be challenged because "it's a threat to charter cities."

She said she's confident the courts would side with cities, citing an Arizona Supreme Court ruling that said local elections are not a statewide concern.

Reach the reporter at Jerod.MacDonald@RepublicMedia.com and follow on Twitter @JerodMacEvoy.

Republic reporter Jessica Boehm contributed to this report.