Cincinnati will have public financing of political campaigns after all.

        Issue 6, the Cincinnati charter amendment for public financing of city candidates' campaigns, apparently failed on Election Night — Nov. 6 — by a mere 23 votes in the unofficial count, but it passed by 547 votes in the official count Saturday, out of nearly 85,000 cast.

        There will be no recount. If there were, opponents would have to pay nearly $4,000 to do it, and an opposition leader said Saturday that is highly unlikely.

HOW IT WORKS

Beginning with the 2003 Cincinnati City Council election, candidates will be able to opt for voluntary campaign spending limits that include partial public financing of their campaigns. Here's how it will work:     • Candidates who agree to spend no more than three times the annual salary of the office they are seeking — about $167,000 for city council candidates — can receive $2 in public funds for every $1 they raise on their own.     • Candidates must abide by campaign contribution limits — $1,000 from individuals, $2,500 from political action committees, $10,000 from political parties.     • Additional campaign finance reporting will be required of all candidates.

        “So be it,” said Chris Finney, attorney for Citizens Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes (COAST), a group which helped lead the opposition.

        “I know it is inconceivable, but this will be the system the city operates under the next time around.”

        Proponents of the charter amendment, who were outspent by about 5-to-1 by the opposition, were jubilant Saturday that the official count — which included several thousand punch card ballots that were not counted on Election Night — gave them a victory.

        The ballots are those cast by voters who walk into the Board of Elections on Election Day instead of going to their own polling places, as well as absentee ballots that have been postmarked on time but not received until after the Election Night tally.

        “This time, the underdogs defeated the fat cats,” said Bill Woods, one of the organizers of Citizens for Fair Elections, the pro-Issue 6 campaign committee.

        The new system, which goes into effect with the 2003 city council election cycle, is aimed at cutting the costs of running for council and mayor.

        Candidates who agree to limit their spending to three times the annual salary of the office they are seeking would get $2 in public funds for every $1 they raise on their own.

        Council candidates would agree to spend no more than $167,103 on their campaigns. Some candidates have routinely spent much more than that in recent council elections.

        It would also set campaign contribution limits — $1,000 from individuals, $2,500 from political action committees, and $10,000 from political parties.

        The system is voluntary — candidates can opt not to take the matching funds and raise as much as they want.

        “We expect in the first few years of this, some candidates will opt out,” said former councilman Pete Strauss, one of the principal organizers of the pro-Issue 6 campaign. “But people will see the merit to this.”

        During the campaign, some opponents hinted that if Issue 6 passed they would file suit to have the charter amendment thrown out on constitutional grounds. Proponents, however, said they carefully crafted the charter amendment language to match similar laws around the country that have held up under court scrutiny.

        “We are not contemplating any legal action at this point,” Mr. Finney said.

        Other cities, including Tuscon, Ariz., and New York City, have similar public financing laws and have not had successful legal challenges, Mr. Strauss said.

        “As long as it is voluntary, it's OK,” Mr. Strauss said.

        The Hamilton County Board of Elections will meet Tuesday to certify the results of Issue 6 and all other election contests in the county.

        Hamilton County Elections Director Julie Stautberg said there would have been an automatic recount of the results had the margin of difference been less than 0.5 percent.

        But the margin of difference was 0.64 percent, putting it outside the automatic recount limit. There could only be a recount if someone asked for one and was willing to pay $10 per precinct to conduct it.
       

Could Saks lead a downtown downturn?
Equity Fund not tapped out
Official count: Yes on Issue 6
March tries to salve wounds
Blind student teaches own lessons
DUI suspect got ticket just before bad crash
Gene could aid asthma treatment
Race discussions continue; hosts are still needed
Tristate A.M. Report
Walk/run nets at least $3,000
BRONSON: No demands
HOWARD: Some Good News
PULFER: The Oyler case
New format throws voters for loop
PAC to seek new rules for court records
Union Twp. working on skate park
Columbus top educator maps path out of abyss
Gehry building enlivens business school
Toledo council approves third online charter school in Ohio
Dayton cop charged with excess force
Gambling in Ky. gets 2nd look
Two cities take pride in name of high school