THE BOARD OF Supervisors is moving to regulate one of the last big pots of local sewer money – the so-called issue-advocacy committees, like the one funded by downtown and real estate interests that savagely attacked Sup. Jake McGoldrick last fall. The current proposal, by board president Aaron Peskin, is a big step in the right direction, but it could go even further.

The committees in question don't officially support or oppose a candidate; they just inform voters about issues. In the District 1 race last fall, that meant putting out a series of hit pieces on McGoldrick. The carefully written pieces never suggested voting against McGoldrick (they urged voters to call his office and complain about his stands on issues), but they were clearly part of an orchestrated effort to push him out of office. And because of a loophole in city law, it was impossible to tell before Election Day who was paying for the pieces.

Peskin wants to require issue groups to disclose all contributions and expenditures before Election Day. Ethics commissioner Joe Lynn wants to treat those groups the same as other campaign committees, with a cap on contributions, and he wants to eliminate the exemption for political clubs, unions, and parties. That makes sense: everyone knows these committees are really just campaign groups exploiting a legal loophole. The supervisors should bring them fully and completely under the city's campaign laws.