Cincinnati taxpayers might have to pick up part of the tab for City Council candidates running in the next election. And if this year's field of 30 competitors is any measure,the public bill could top $3 million.

        That's because of a pro posal — which seeks to limit campaign spending by offering public subsidies to candidates — that voters will be asked to approve on the Nov. 6 ballot.

Check candidates and issues in four counties

        But voters who were asked about Issue 6 appear unfamiliar with the proposal.

        “I don't know, I've never heard anything about it,” said Ronnie Trimble of Covedale. “Just don't know.”

        Mr. Trimble, who said he tries to stay on top of issues and plans on voting next week, can see the merits and the pitfalls of the measure.

        “Most people who give to a campaign want something back. You've heard of rebating, right?” he said. “But why should taxpayers give money to somebody to do their jobs?”

        Issue 6 has largely become lost among other campaign issues, particularly the highly publicized civil-service reform, which would change how Cincinnati's police and fire chiefs are hired.

        Supporters of Issue 6 say its passage is critical to ensure a fair election process and to put all candidates on a level playing field.

        In addition to rewarding candidates who voluntarily limit their contributions, Issue 6 would: require candidates to file more contribution disclosures; limit the amount of donations every candidate can receive; penalize those who go over the limit; and create an oversight board.

        “Sure this is going to cost some money,” said Bill Woods, a member of the Citizens for Fair Elections campaign. “But it is worth it in terms of the city owning the election process.”

        He said the system now intimidates people from running for office, because many know they can't raise themoney it takes to win an election. He said incumbents have the advantage and that limits challengers.

        This year 30 people sought election to city offices: four for mayor and 26 for council. The September primary eliminated two mayoral candidates but that left a pool of 28 candidates.

        Campaign disclosure reports show only five City Council candidates have raised more than $100,000. Nine candidates have raised between $10,000 and $92,000. Eleven candidates have raised less than $10,000.

        In the mayor's race, incumbent Charlie Luken has raised $355,585 and challenger Courtis Fuller has raised $64,081.

        “We're asking taxpayers to subsidize viewpoints they don't agree with,” said Councilman Pat DeWine, who is opposed to Issue 6. “Under this reform, any KKK, racist or other yahoo is eligible for ($111,400) of public money.”

        Mr. DeWine, who with $309,508 has raised more than any other council candidate, says there are loopholes in the ordinance.

        Chief among them, he said, is that the mayor — who is subject to penalties — is charged with appointing members of the oversight board. He also said Issue 6 does nothing to stop special-interest groups from helping candidates through indirect campaigns.

        Issue 6 mirrors an ordinance passed by Cincinnati City Council in 1997 but rescinded a year later. Under Issue 6, candidates who agree to limit campaign spending to three times their elected salary would get $2 in public funds for every $1 they raise.

        Contributions from political action committees or political parties would not be matched.

        To qualify, council candidates must raise $5,000 from at least 150 contributors and mayoral candidates must raise $10,000 from 300 contributors.

        “There is a cost to the status quo,” said Catherine Turcer of the Citizens Policy Center in Columbus and an Issue 6 supporter.

        In an analysis of campaign spending in Cincinnati, Ms. Turcer said her agency found that more than half of the top 25 contributors in 1997 and 1999 Cincinnati elections had contracts with the city.

        She said incumbent candidates raised 1.5 times more than challengers in the 1999 election and 3.6 times more in 1997. She also said the analysis found that winning candidates spent at least three times more than the losers in those elections.

        Ms. Turcer said there is a clear benefit to wealthy individuals who contribute to campaigns.

        Chris Finney, a lawyer and a member of the Issue 6 opposition group, No Taxes for City Council Campaigns Committee, calls the proposal goofy.

        “First of all, buying elections and buying influence is illegal,” he said. “Enforce the laws that exist.”

        He said Issue 6 seeks to punish people for wanting to involve themselves in the election process by donating to a campaign. Instead, he said, they should focus on increasing voter participation.

        “The entire thrust of what they are trying to do is wrong,” Mr. Finney said.

Jurors weigh verdict on Jorg
Witness describes Owensby arrest
One girl pleads in poison case
Ross student excels on all fields
Luken, Fuller to debate on live TV
City officials rap chief
Issue 6 subsidizes candidates
Levy gives agency vital funds
Neyer pulls company out of Banks plan
PULFER: Are we allowed to laugh yet?
Anderson argues sign placement
Congrats
Good News: La Salle 'Truck' rolls on
Local Digest
Deerfield settles clerk's suit
Foes' lawsuit over Millikin Woods halted
Hummer Park work progresses
Rural acreage rarer
'Shaken baby' trial under way
Third Butler skate park on way
Two school candidates are shoo-ins
School celebrates national award
Teen makes a difference for orphans
Family won't budge for TANK
Heart-device patient better
Kentucky Digest
Patriotic planners think big
Hunting policy called 'revenge on Kentucky'