referenda reporting and disclosure requirements. (Id. at 11.) While the Defendants’ asserted interests may be important and, even compelling in the context of regulating contributions in elections for public office, this Court finds that they are not relevant in referenda elections. Regarding the anti-corruption interest, the Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that such an interest is far diminished in the referendum context: “Referenda are held on issues, not candidates for public office. The risk of corruption perceived in cases involving candidate elections ... simply is not present in a popular vote on a public issue.” First Nat’l Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 790, 98 S.Ct. 1407, 55 L.Ed.2d 707 (1978) (internal citation omitted); see also Reed, 130 S.Ct. at 2840 (<HOLDING>); Citizens Against Ren or an informed
holding that risk must be measured at the time the lawsuit is filed holding that the filing of a motion for a new trial is a critical stage of the prosecution and that an indigent defendant is constitutionally entitled to the assistance of counsel at that stage holding that a plaintiff has a duty to plead the date of discovery of fraud where the alleged fraud apparently occurred at a remote time recognizing that the risk of fraud or corruption is more remote at the petition stage of an initiative than at the time of balloting holding that the application of the fair use doctrine at the pleading stage is appropriate