Election 2026 · City of Los Angeles

Charter Amendment SC: Campaign finance rules for school board races

Published September 29, 2026 · Updated October 2, 2026

Charter Amendment SC would delete the separate, detailed campaign finance rules for LAUSD Board of Education races from the City Charter and apply the rules for mayoral candidates instead, with some exceptions. It would let the City Council make later changes to these rules by ordinance. Only LAUSD voters decide it.

Summary by CityHallPass, not the official text or legal advice. The official text controls: City Clerk's voter information pamphlet.

What would Charter Amendment SC cost?

The City Administrative Officer says the measure is not expected to have a financial impact on the City.

The details

The question on your ballot

Shall the Los Angeles City Charter be amended to clarify the campaign finance rules for Board of Education elections and allow for changes by ordinance?

Why only LAUSD voters decide it

The City Charter sets the campaign finance rules for LAUSD Board of Education elections, so changing them takes a City Charter amendment. The State Constitution requires Charter changes about Board of Education elections to be approved by a majority of voters in the school district, in a separate measure, the City Attorney told the Council (City Attorney report R26-0380, pp. 9-10). The Council called a special election in the school district for Nov. 3 (Ordinance 188984). The City Clerk printed three pamphlet editions: one for City voters only, one for City voters who also live in LAUSD, and one for LAUSD voters outside the City (City Clerk ballot measures page).

What would change

Charter sections that change

SC amends one section of the City Charter, Section 803 (“Election of Board Members”) (full text):

• Opening paragraph. The first sentence stays: school board elections follow Charter Sections 400 through 440 and City election ordinances. The paragraph’s purpose clause about limiting contributions also stays. SC adds: candidates “shall be subject to the same campaign finance provisions that apply to candidates for Mayor, including in Section 470 and any ordinances adopted in accordance with Section 470(c) or other sections of the Charter,” except Sections 470(c)(11) and 470(c)(12), Section 471, “and as otherwise excepted by ordinance.” It deletes the words saying the section supplements the Political Reform Act of 1974.
• Subsections (a) through (y) are deleted in full. They cover definitions, including when outside spending counts as coordinated with a candidate (a); contribution limits of $1,000 per person, with no limit on a candidate’s own money (b); the four-year inflation review (c); cash and anonymous gifts (d); the single campaign bank account (e); treasurers, training and records (f)-(i); contributions under a false name (j); spending not controlled by a candidate (k); recalls (l); vendor records (m); combining gifts from related donors (n); family gifts (o); returned gifts (p); fundraising windows (q); reporting and online filing (r); disclosure of independent spending (s); verification (t); the Ethics Commission’s duties (u); criminal and civil enforcement (v); losing an election or office after a conviction (w); late filing fines (x); and severability (y) (full text, pp. 74-87).
• Section 2 of the measure is a standard severability clause. No other Charter section is amended.

The Charter Reform Commission’s draft also excluded the City’s rules on officeholder and legal defense committees (Commission report, p. 174). The ballot text does not name them, so any such exception would have to come by ordinance (proposed Sec. 803). The City does not now regulate those committees for LAUSD officials (Ethics Commission contributor guide).

How it got on the ballot

SC came out of the City’s 2025-26 Charter review. The Council placed it on the ballot. No petition was involved.

• Oct. 28, 2025: The City Ethics Commission recommended taking Section 803 out of the Charter “so LAUSD elections are treated the same as citywide candidate elections,” the Charter Reform Commission reported (Commission report, p. 289).
• April 2, 2026: The Charter Reform Commission recommended the change unanimously, 8-0, citing “more flexibility in updating the rules and regulations” (Commission report, p. 289).
• June 10, 2026: The Chief Legislative Analyst recommended sending it to voters. Its report says the Rules committee “did not discuss this item” (CLA report, p. 71).
• June 17, 2026: The Council approved it 15-0 (Council recap, item 19).
• June 26, 2026: The City Attorney drafted two measures for LAUSD voters: SC and one to let the Council allow noncitizens to vote in school board races (City Attorney report R26-0380, pp. 9-10). On June 30 the Council sent the noncitizen voting measure back to committee, leaving SC as the only LAUSD-only measure (ABC7; Patch).
• June 30, 2026: The Council voted 14-0 to put SC on the ballot. Curren Price was absent (Council action). The Mayor approved on July 10, and the election ordinance took effect July 15 (Ordinance 188984).
• Aug. 4, 2026: Diego Andrades, a former Charter Reform commissioner, and Chad Hamilton Shields asked to write the argument in favor. No one asked to write one against. Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson picked Andrades, and the Rules committee approved 4-0 (City Clerk list of applicants; committee memo).

Related past measures.

• Charter Amendment LL (November 2024): created an independent commission to redraw LAUSD board districts. Like SC, it was a City Charter change about school board elections. It passed with 75.76% (County election results).
• Charter Amendment ER (November 2024): gave the City Ethics Commission, which enforces both City and LAUSD campaign rules, a minimum budget and more independence (County election results).

What each side says

In the City pamphlet. Ballot arguments are the authors’ opinions. No City agency checks them for accuracy (City pamphlet). No argument against SC was submitted.

Argument in favor, signed by Councilmember Adrin Nazarian, LAUSD Board Member Nick Melvoin, Diego Andrades, California Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of Greater Los Angeles (argument in favor):

• The difference between the two rulebooks “does not necessarily lie in the rules themselves but rather in where those rules appear.”
• SC “simplifies the Charter and reduces bureaucratic bloat and redundancy.”
• It is “a straightforward good-government reform.”

Outside the pamphlet.

• Daily News columnist Susan Shelley recommends a no vote. She wrote that SC “would enable the City Council to pass an ordinance later that changes the campaign finance rules for school board races” (Daily News, Sept. 29, 2026).
• Mona Field, a Charter Reform Commission member, called SC “arcane” and urged yes votes on all the Charter measures (Golden State Report, Aug. 12, 2026).

Checking the main factual claims against official records.

Who supports and opposes it

Supporters

• Pamphlet signers: Councilmember Adrin Nazarian, LAUSD Board Member Nick Melvoin, Diego Andrades, California Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of Greater Los Angeles. The pamphlet says titles are for identification only (argument in favor).
• The City Ethics Commission recommended the underlying change to the Charter Reform Commission in 2025 (Commission report, p. 289). We found no statement from the Ethics Commission on the ballot measure itself.

Opponents

• No one applied to write the argument against, and no committee has formed for or against SC (committee memo; City Ethics election totals).
• Daily News columnist Susan Shelley recommends no (Daily News).

LAUSD. We found no position from the LAUSD Board of Education as a body. The district’s April 30 letter to the Council on Charter reform addressed only the voting age (LAUSD letter). Board Member Nick Melvoin signed the argument in favor.

Editorial boards, parties and other groups. We found no LA Times or Daily News editorial board position, and no published position from the Los Angeles County Democratic or Republican parties, United Teachers Los Angeles or the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, as of Sept. 30, 2026.

Money for and against

Source: City Ethics election totals and the City Ethics independent expenditure search, checked Sept. 30, 2026.

Who is giving

No contributions have been reported, so there are no donors to analyze.

Outside spending

None reported as of Sept. 30, 2026.

Independent analysis

The City’s official analyses are the CLA’s impartial summary (City pamphlet) and the CAO’s financial impact statement (City pamphlet). We found no other published analysis of SC.

What changes in practice

• Contribution limit. Both the school board and mayoral limits start from a $1,000 base. The school board limit is reviewed every four years and was $1,500 for 2026. The City’s limits are adjusted every year, and the citywide limit was $1,800 for 2026 (current Sec. 803(b)-(c); Commission report, p. 289; contributor guide). The Chief Legislative Analyst says the limits “may be periodically adjusted, with the baseline for these limits maintained at $1,000,” and that “additional restrictions or exceptions” can be set by ordinance (impartial summary). The City has not published what the limit would be.
• Who writes the rules. Today, changing the school board rules takes a vote of everyone in LAUSD (City Attorney report, p. 9). Under SC, the City Council could change them, and add exceptions, by ordinance (proposed Sec. 803). The Council is elected by City voters. LAUSD also serves voters outside the City, who get their own pamphlet edition (City Clerk ballot measures page). This shift is the point Shelley objects to and the flexibility the Charter Reform Commission cited (Daily News; Commission report, p. 289).
• What stays the same. LAUSD candidates remain outside the matching funds program and the lobbyist and City contractor bans. The Ethics Commission remains the enforcer (proposed Sec. 803; impartial summary).

Money in school board races

Contribution limits apply to gifts to candidates, not to independent spending. On the Ethics Commission’s 2026 totals page, the three LAUSD seats on the 2026 ballot (Districts 2, 4 and 6) show $642,876.03 in contributions to candidates and $1,309,688.88 in independent spending supporting candidates. In District 2, independent spending was $900,820.68 against $76,347.74 in contributions (City Ethics election totals). SC would replace the disclosure rules for that spending in Section 803(s) with the City’s rules. It sets no limit on independent spending.

If it passes

• When it takes effect. A Charter amendment takes effect when it is filed with the California Secretary of State after the vote is certified (California Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 3).
• Races affected. The next regular LAUSD board races after 2026 would be the first held under the City rules. SC sets no transition date, and we found no Ethics Commission guidance yet on limits or fundraising windows under SC.
• Ordinances. The Council would decide by ordinance whether to add exceptions for school board races, such as the officeholder committee exception in the Commission’s draft (proposed Sec. 803; Commission report, p. 174).
• Legal challenges. None filed or announced as of Sept. 30, 2026.

Key moments

We found no debate or forum focused on SC in news coverage or City records as of Sept. 30, 2026. The Rules committee did not discuss it before recommending it (CLA report, p. 71), and both Council votes were unanimous among members present (Council recap; Council action).

Polls

We found no public poll on SC from an academic, media or nonpartisan pollster as of Sept. 30, 2026.