In 2019, Ballotpedia is covering elections across 63 Texas school districts for 184 school board seats. Fifty-five of the districts held elections in May, and eight districts are holding elections on November 5, 2019. The districts holding elections in November have a combined 26 out of their 58 school board seats up for election.
Nine seats up for election in November are uncontested (34.6%), while the May elections had 64 uncontested races (40.5%). Across all Texas school boards covered by Ballotpedia in 2019, 73 of the races (39.7%) are uncontested. Five of the eight districts holding elections in November have at least one unopposed candidate. In 2019, 43 of the 63 school board districts had or will have at least one race with an unopposed candidate.
Sixty-four candidates filed for the November elections, which is approximately 2.46 candidates per seat. The May elections had 314 candidates file, roughly 1.99 candidates per seat. In all, 378 candidates filed across 184 seats, so roughly 2.05 candidates filed per seat in the Texas school board elections. These figures are all higher than the 2016 Texas average of 1.79 school board candidates per seat and the 2016 national average of 1.90 school board candidates per seat.
Twenty incumbents (76.9%) filed for re-election in the November races. In May, 117 incumbents (74.1%) filed for re-election, meaning that 137 incumbents (74.5%) ran or are running for re-election in 2019.
The eight school districts holding elections in November served a combined total of 578,401 students during the 2016-2017 school year.
Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) suspended his presidential campaign on Friday, August 23, making him the sixth notable Democrat to do so. “I think it’s evident that this is now a three-way race between Biden, Warren and Sanders, and really it’s a debate about how far left the party should go,” he said in an interview with The New York Times.
His campaign suspension left 23 notable candidates—21 Democrats and two Republicans—actively campaigning for president in 2020. Moulton’s exit left two U.S. Reps. in the Democratic field, along with seven U.S. Senators, two mayors, and one governor.
President Donald Trump (R) is seeking re-election. He defeated Hillary Clinton (D) in 2016 with 304 electoral votes to Clinton’s 227. Clinton received 48.3 percent of the popular vote while Trump received 46.2 percent of the popular vote.
On July 30, a U.S. district court judge struck down a federal revenue procedure that had exempted select 501(c) nonprofit entities from disclosing the names and addresses of their donors to the Internal Revenue Service. Judge Brian Morris, appointed to the bench by President Barack Obama (D), found that the IRS failed to follow proper procedures when it made the rule change.
What was at issue? On July 16, 2018, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2018-38, which exempted 501(c) nonprofit entities from reporting the names and addresses of their contributors to the agency. The rule change did not apply to 501(c)(3) organizations.
Who were the parties to the suit? The plaintiffs were Montana Gov. Stephen Bullock (D), a 2020 presidential candidate, and the Montana Department of Revenue. The state of New Jersey later joined the suit. The defendants were the Internal Revenue Service, Acting IRS Commissioner David Kautter, and the Treasury Department.
How did the court rule? In striking down Revenue Procedure 2018-38, Judge Morris said he was not ruling on the procedure’s merits. Instead, he was assessing the validity of the process used to enact it: “Plaintiffs ask simply for the opportunity to submit written data and opposing views or arguments, as required by the APA’s public notice-and-comment process, before it changes the long-established reporting requirements. A proper notice-and-comment procedure will provide the IRS with the opportunity to review and consider information submitted by the public and interested parties. Then, and only then, may the IRS act on a fully-informed basis when making potentially significant changes to federal tax law.”
What were the arguments?
In a court filing, attorneys for the plaintiffs said, “Reduced transparency for 501(c) organizations at the federal level has significant downstream effects. In the context of elections and election spending, reduced transparency at the IRS upends settled expectations that federal tax-exempt organizations are what they purport to be: domestically-funded social welfare groups validly participating in elections, for example.”
Before oral arguments, Justice Department attorneys for the defendants said, “Neither state has ever before sought or received from the IRS the information they are now trying to force the IRS to continue collecting, and both states lack the ability to obtain this information from the IRS even if it was collected. In issuing Revenue Procedure 2018-38, the IRS exercised its longstanding statutory discretion to determine what information it collects from exempt organizations to meet its tax administration needs.”
What comes next? The federal government has not indicated whether it intends to appeal the decision. The case name and number are Bullock v. Internal Revenue Service, 4:18-cv-00103-BMM.
Number of relevant bills by state: We’re currently tracking 72 pieces of legislation dealing with donor disclosure. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking.
Number of relevant bills by current legislative status
Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s)
Recent legislative actions
Below is a complete list of legislative actions taken on relevant bills in the past week. Bills are listed in alphabetical order, first by state then by bill number. Know of any legislation we’re missing? Please email us so we can include it on our tracking list.
California AB1217: This bill would expand the definition of “advertisement” under the state’s campaign finance laws, thereby extending existing disclosure requirements.
Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee hearing Aug. 20.
California AB864: This bill would expand disclosure requirements for certain kinds of political advertisements made by independent expenditure groups and other entities.
Wisconsin Rep. Sean Duffy (R) announced his resignation from the U.S. House August 26, effective at the end of September. In a post to his Facebook page, Duffy cited the need to spend more time with his family as he and his wife expected the birth of their ninth child.
“With much prayer, I have decided that this is the right time for me to take a break from public service in order to be the support my wife, baby and family need right now. It is not an easy decision – because I truly love being your Congressman – but it is the right decision for my family, which is my first love and responsibility.”
Duffy will be the second member of the 116th Congress to resign this year. Former Rep. Tom Marino (R) resigned his seat in Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District in January. As of August 26, 15 representatives said they will not seek re-election to their U.S. House seats. That number includes three Democratic and 12 Republican members.
On August 27, Phoenix voters will decide Proposition 105 and Proposition 106 in a special election.
If approved, Proposition 105 would end construction of light rail extensions and redirect funds to infrastructure improvements in Phoenix. Building a Better Phoenix sponsored the initiative and argued, “Phoenix taxpayers are wasting BILLIONS on light rail expansion at the expense of other critical infrastructure. This is money that can be used to fix our streets and sidewalks, expand bus and dial-a-ride service, improve lighting and address other infrastructure improvements.” The Building a Better Phoenix committee reported $460,000 in cash contributions, $29,000 in in-kind contributions, and $394,000 in cash expenditures through August 10 (the last day covered by pre-election campaign finance reports). Top donors to the campaign were Mel Martin, Chris Hinkson, Rachel Palopoli, and Scot Mussi.
If approved, Proposition 106 would do the following:
require annual assessments of the city’s pension debt,
limit budget growth if pensions are not 90% funded,
earmark revenue over the budget limit to paying down pension debt, and
require city officials to reimburse the city for pension benefit employer contributions.
Responsible Budgets Inc. sponsored Proposition 106. Councilmember Sal DiCiccio (District 6) argued, “The City of Phoenix owes $4.4 BILLION on our pensions! Responsible Budgets takes the first steps to addressing Phoenix’s long term funding deficit[.]” The committee reported $197,000 in cash contributions, $101,000 in in-kind contributions, and $298,000 in cash expenditures. Top donors included Pass the Balanced Budget Amendment, Morning in America, and Chuck Warren.
Opponents of the initiatives joined to form the Invest in PHX, No on 105 and 106 campaign. Concerning Proposition 105, the campaign argued, “Prop 105 stops all light rail construction and kills light rail plans already approved by voters three times. … It also sends billions in federal dollars to cities in other states.” Concerning Proposition 106, the campaign argued, “Prop 106 is dangerous, and would slash access to critical city services like parks, libraries, senior centers, and support for those experiencing homelessness, just as Phoenix emerges from the worst recession in generations.” The top donors to the Invest in PHX committee were Devil’s Advocate, We Build Arizona, and Greater Phoenix Leadership, Inc.
Both measures are citizen initiatives that required 20,510 signatures from registered city voters to qualify for the ballot. In Phoenix, initiative petition signatures must equal 15 percent of the voters who voted in the previous mayoral election.
Today’s Brew highlights Ballotpedia’s first-ever comprehensive local coverage of a state + looks ahead to the 2020 party conventions
T
Welcome to the Monday, August 26 Brew. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
Ballotpedia launches comprehensive coverage of North Carolina local elections
At this time next year, we will be between Democratic and Republican National Conventions
Reminder: Phoenix voters will decide citizen initiatives on light rail, city pensions tomorrow
Ballotpedia launches comprehensive coverage of North Carolina local elections
There are 503 cities, towns, and villages across North Carolina holding elections for 1,900 positions this year, and for the first time ever, Ballotpedia’s sample ballot is expanding to encompass every election in a state. In addition to the municipal races, there are nine school districts holding elections for 23 school board seats and 17 special districts holding elections for 52 seats. This adds up to 529 localities holding elections for 1,975 positions in North Carolina this year.
Jurisdictions differ in how they structure their elections – there is no statewide mandated system. Local elections in North Carolina can follow four different methods during odd-numbered years:
In partisan elections where runoffs are possible, the primary is September 10, the primary runoff is October 8, and the general election is November 5. Primary runoffs may be held if no candidate receives at least 30% of the primary vote; however, the primary runoff is only held if the second-place candidate requests it. In 2019, only Charlotte and Sanford are following this method.
In nonpartisan elections where runoffs are possible, the general election is October 8 and the general runoff election is November 5. General runoffs may be held if no candidate receives at least 50% of the general election vote; however, the general runoff is only held if the second-place candidate requests it.
In nonpartisan elections with primaries where runoffs aren’t possible, the primary is October 8 and the general election is November 5. If only two or fewer candidates file to run per seat, the primary is not held and the candidates who filed advance automatically to the general election.
In nonpartisan elections without primaries where runoffs aren’t possible, the general election is November 5. These are plurality elections in which the candidate who receives the most votes wins; the winner does not need to meet a certain threshold of the overall vote to avoid a runoff. Most North Carolina local elections in 2019 are following this method.
Across the state, there are 65 local positions where no candidates filed to run. This includes the mayor’s office in 19 municipalities, the city or town council in 43 municipalities, and board positions in two special districts. These positions will be filled by write-in candidates who have been certified by their county board of elections.
Three of the state’s largest cities—Charlotte, Durham, and Raleigh—are among those holding elections in 2019. The mayor’s office is on the ballot in all three cities, and so are all 11 city council seats in Charlotte, three of seven city council seats in Durham, and all seven city council seats in Raleigh.
North Carolina’s local filing deadline passed on July 19, 2019. However, municipalities were permitted by the state government to extend their filing deadline by one week. There are also some exceptions to the statewide filing deadline; in Catawba County, Hickory Public Schools and Newton-Conover City Schools both have their filing deadline on September 6.
At Ballotpedia, we are excited to debut this full, comprehensive, statewide coverage in 2019. We hope it will continue to extend to other states in future years. Stay tuned!
At this time next year, we will be between Democratic and Republican National Conventions
In just under a year, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) will hold its presidential nominating convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from July 13 to 16. A little over a month later, the Republican National Committee (RNC) will meet in Charlotte, North Carolina, from August 24 to 27. At both conventions, delegates will select their party’s presidential nominee and vote to adopt a platform outlining the party’s priorities and values.
Democratic and Republican primaries and caucuses will begin with the first caucus event taking place in Iowa on February 3, 2020. New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina will also hold primaries in February.
Super Tuesday—the day when the largest number of states and territories hold a presidential primary or caucus—will be March 3, 2020. Sixteen Democratic and 14 Republican nominating events are scheduled for that date. States with more than one-third of the U.S. population are expected to vote on Super Tuesday. The last primary elections of the cycle will be held at the beginning of June 2020.
In 2016, the RNC held its presidential nominating convention in Cleveland from July 18-21, 2016, and the DNC held its convention in Philadelphia from July 25-28, 2016.
Phoenix voters will decide citizen initiatives on light rail, city pensions tomorrow
Phoenix voters will decide two citizen initiatives in a special ballot initiative election tomorrow that would amend the city’s charter.
Proposition 105 would:
end construction of light rail extensions;
redirect funds from light rail projects to other transportation infrastructure improvements in Phoenix; and
prohibit funding other light rail development, with an exception for PHX Sky Train—an automated electric train that serves the area around Phoenix International Airport.
Proposition 106 would:
require annual assessments of the city’s pension debt based on generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and the 10-year average return on investment;
limit budget growth if pensions are not 90% funded;
earmark revenue over the budget limit to paying down pension debt, with exceptions for police, fire, and first responder services; and
require city officials to reimburse the city for pension benefit employer contributions.
Learn more about the measures on Ballotpedia and follow along on Ballotpedia News for results on Wednesday.
On Aug. 7, Pennsylvania state employee Catherine Kioussis filed a class-action lawsuit against the Service Employees International Union Local 668 seeking restitution for agency fees paid to the union in 2017 and 2018.
Who are the parties to the suit?
Kioussis, the plaintiff, works for the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services. She is represented by the Liberty Justice Center, a nonprofit public-interest law firm that represented Mark Janus in Janus v. AFSCME (2018). The defendant is the Service Employees International Union Local 668, which represents public- and private-sector social service workers at both the state and municipal levels of government. According to a federal disclosure report, SEIU Local 668 comprised 16,507 dues-paying members and 361 agency fee payers as of Dec. 31, 2018.
What’s at issue?
Kioussiss alleges “SEIU should have known that its seizure of [agency fees] from non-consenting employees likely violated the First Amendment.” Kioussiss seeks a refund of all agency fees she and other non-member employees paid to the union from Aug. 7, 2017, to June 27, 2018, the period permitted under Pennsylvania’s statute of limitations. According to the Liberty Justice Center, should the case be decided in Kioussiss’ favor, approximately 2,000 workers could receive as much as $1 million in restitution.
What are the reactions?
Brian Kelsey, an attorney with the Liberty Justice Center, said, “It’s unfortunate [Kioussiss’] constitutional rights were violated. We’re going to make sure she can get her money back now, or at least as much as we can gather that she paid over the last couple years.”
SEIU Local 669 President Steve Catanese said, “The Liberty Justice Center, along with other anti-union organizations such as the Fairness Center, is being funded by millions of dollars in dark money donations from billionaires and corporations. The sole purpose of these organizations and investments in them is to file frivolous litigation against labor unions and undermine the ability of workers to have a voice at the workplace.”
What comes next?
The case is pending before Judge John E. Jones III of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. President George W. Bush (R) appointed Jones in 2002. The case name and number are Kioussis v. Service Employees International Union Local 668, 1:19-cv-01367.
The big picture
Number of relevant bills by state
We are currently tracking 102 pieces of legislation dealing with public-sector employee union policy. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking.
Number of relevant bills by current legislative status
Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s)
Recent legislative actions
No legislative actions have occurred since our last issue.
There are 503 cities, towns, and villages across North Carolina holding elections for 1,900 positions this year, and for the first time ever, Ballotpedia’s sample ballot is expanding to encompass every election in a state, even in the smallest villages. In addition to the municipal races, there are nine school districts holding elections for 23 school board seats and 17 special districts holding elections for 52 seats; no counties are holding elections. This adds up to 529 localities holding elections for 1,975 positions in North Carolina this year.
Local elections in North Carolina can follow four different methods during odd-numbered years:
1.) In partisan elections where runoffs are possible, the primary is on September 10, the primary runoff is on October 8, and the general election is on November 5. Primary runoffs may be held if no candidate receives at least 30% of the primary vote; however, the primary runoff is only held if the second-place candidate requests it. In 2019, only Charlotte and Sanford are following this method.
2.) In nonpartisan elections where runoffs are possible, the general election is on October 8 and the general runoff election is on November 5. General runoffs may be held if no candidate receives at least 50% of the general election vote; however, the general runoff is only held if the second-place candidate requests it. In 2019, only Atlantic Beach, Cary, Dobbins Heights, Dunn, Elizabeth City, Erwin, Henderson, Monroe, Raleigh, Rocky Mount, and Statesville are following this method.
3.) In nonpartisan elections with primaries where runoffs aren’t possible, the primary is on October 8 and the general election is on November 5. If only two or fewer candidates file to run per seat, the primary is not held and the candidates who filed advance automatically to the general election. In 2019, only Asheboro (and Asheboro City Schools), Bermuda Run, Burlington, Durham, Fayetteville, Flat Rock, Fletcher, Goldsboro, Hendersonville, Hickory, High Point, Jamestown, Matthews, Mooresville, Mount Airy, Pleasant Garden, Powellsville, Ramseur, Shelby, Southern Pines, and Windsor are following this method.
4.) In nonpartisan elections without primaries where runoffs aren’t possible, the general election is on November 5. These are plurality elections in which the candidate who receives the most votes wins; the winner does not need to meet a certain threshold of the overall vote to avoid a runoff. All other North Carolina local elections in 2019 are following this method.
Across the state, there are 65 local positions where no candidates filed to run. This includes the mayor’s office in 19 municipalities, the city or town council in 43 municipalities, and board positions in two special districts. These positions will be filled by write-in candidates who have been certified by their county board of elections.
Three of the state’s largest cities—Charlotte, Durham, and Raleigh—are among those holding elections in 2019. The mayor’s office is on the ballot in all three cities, and so are all 11 city council seats in Charlotte, three of seven city council seats in Durham, and all seven city council seats in Raleigh.
North Carolina’s local filing deadline passed on July 19, 2019. However, municipalities were permitted by the state government to extend their filing deadline by one week. There are also some exceptions to the statewide filing deadline; in Catawba County, Hickory Public Schools and Newton-Conover City Schools both have their filing deadline on September 6.
The Republican nomination for governor of Mississippi will be decided by a primary runoff between Lt. Gov. Tate Reeves and former state Supreme Court Chief Justice Bill Waller Jr. Tuesday. Reeves and Waller were the top two finishers in the August 6 primary but neither won the majority of the vote necessary to win outright.
Reeves, who is in his second term as lieutenant governor after serving two terms as state treasurer, says that his experience in state government would make him an effective chief executive. He says that he is the more conservative of the two, and has criticized Waller for supporting Medicaid expansion and an increase in the state gas tax.
Waller calls himself a conservative Republican but says that he would win more support from Democratic and independent voters than Reeves would in the general election. He has criticized the tone of Reeves’ campaign, saying that Reeves is more focused on attacking him than on proposing policies to address the problems Mississippi faces.
Both candidates have secured new endorsements since the August 6 primary. Reeves, who already had the endorsement of term-limited incumbent Phil Bryant (R), was endorsed by a series of state officials including former Gov. Haley Barbour (R) and state Sen. Chris McDaniel (R). Waller was endorsed by third-place primary finisher Robert Foster (R). Foster and Waller received a combined 51.1% of the primary vote to Reeves’ 48.9%.
Campaign finance reports filed Tuesday show that Reeves spent $1.9 million and Waller spent $315,000 between July 28 and August 17. During the same period, Waller raised $550,000 to Reeves’ $300,000. The two met for a final debate Wednesday night.
Mississippi has open primaries, so the runoff is open to registered Democrats and independents who did not vote in the Democratic primary on August 6. The winner will face Attorney General Jim Hood (D) in the November 5 general election. In order to win the general election, a candidate must both win the statewide vote and carry a majority of the 122 state House districts. If no candidate does both, the state House will decide the winner. No Democrat has won election as governor of Mississippi since Ronnie Musgrove (D) in 1999.
Tucson is holding partisan primary elections for mayor and three of seven city council seats on Tuesday. Six of the city council seats are elected at large, and the mayor occupies the seventh seat. The general election is scheduled for November 5, and the filing deadline passed on May 29.
Four candidates filed in the mayoral race. Three of the four candidates—Randi Dorman, Steve Farley, and Regina Romero—are competing in the Democratic primary. The fourth candidate, independent Edward Ackerley, will face the Democratic primary winner on the general election ballot. No Republican candidates filed to run. Incumbent Jonathan Rothschild (D) announced in December 2018 that he would not seek re-election, ensuring a newcomer will take the office. Rothschild was first elected mayor in 2011 and re-elected in 2015.
Tucson City Council Wards 1, 2, and 4 are also on the ballot. In Ward 1, incumbent Regina Romero chose to run for mayor rather than for re-election. Four Democrats filed to run for her seat. In Ward 2, Democratic incumbent Paul Cunningham is running for re-election against Republican Ewart Williams Jr. Ward 4 incumbent Shirley Scott did not file to run for re-election. Democrat Nikki Lee and Republican Michael Hicks are running for that open seat.
Tucson is the second-largest city in Arizona and the 32nd-largest city in the U.S. by population.
T
