BATH

The City Council voted 8-0 Wednesday to endorse an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would limit the influence of money in elections.

Bath joins 20 other Maine municipalities with similar resolutions — including Brunswick, which passed its measure Feb. 4.

The movement stems from a Supreme Court decision, commonly known as “Citizens United,” that recognizes corporations as people and allows them to spend unlimited sums to influence elections.

Prior to Wednesday’s vote, the resolution — put forth by a group called Move to Amend Bath — was amended three times to broaden its focus to include more than corporations.

Ward 3 Councilor Carolyn Lockwood noted that unions and other groups, as well as corporations, pour big money into elections.

“It’s too political to have the laser focus on corporations,” she said.

At-large Councilor Steve Brackett agreed. The council then voted for the amended version, which reads:

“The City Council of the City of Bath hereby resolves to support an amendment to the United States Constitution to firmly establish that money is not free speech and that human beings, not other entities such as corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights.”

Jerry Provencher, Bruce Gagnon and others involved in the grass-roots movement looked on as speaker after speaker emerged from the audience to voice support for the resolution.

Karen Wainberg held up a petition with 780 supporting signatures, saying people who signed understand that too much money in the political process has come at the expense of democracy.

Provencher thanked the council, the clerk’s office and staff for its cooperation.

“For me,” Provencher said, “it was a really good experience in local democracy at work.”

Susan Lubner pointed out that $11 million was spent in last year’s race for the state’s U.S. Senate seat — much of it from out of state.

Lubner said Super PACs “launder” money from wealthy donors, and don’t have to list them.

“The thing about the out-ofstate money is, it’s not focused on local issues, generally,” she said.

Peter Alexander opined that, in the early days of the Republic, corporations were heavily regulated.

“From the ground up,” Alexander said, “maybe we can change this terrible decision by the Supreme Court.”

Earlier, with little discussion, the council rescinded an order it passed on Dec. 19 that identified 45 Windjammer Way as a dangerous building.

The council had ordered Alan and Yvonne Orchard to vacate.

While the appeal process was ongoing, people helped to repair the foundation and roof of the building.

The vote to rescind the order states that the engineer and the codes-enforcement officer have inspected the premises and “found the repairs to be adequate to prevent collapse of the structure.”

lgrard@timesrecord.com