A majority of supervisors Tuesday directed county attorneys to
have an ordinance drafted by Aug. 24 setting a $500 limit on
individual campaign donations and a $10,000 spending cap for
district elections.
A majority of supervisors Tuesday directed county attorneys to have an ordinance drafted by Aug. 24 setting a $500 limit on individual campaign donations and a $10,000 spending cap for district elections.
Supervisors Bob Cruz, Pat Loe and Ruth Kesler agreed during the talk to include the maximum individual donation – with an overall spending limit of $10,000 for district campaigns and $25,000 for countywide races.
Also under the new law, donors’ names would be left off public documents only if they donated $25 or less – a drop-off from the $99 maximum governed by the state. And every business – or a total amount of donations from its employees – would have to abide by the new law’s individual donor limit.
The three supervisors have pushed through the ordinance, saying it would prevent wrongdoing and keep campaign spending as fair as possible.
Supervisor Reb Monaco is concerned about some aspects of the prospective law. He’s received calls from people worried that $10,000 and $25,000, respectively, aren’t enough money to run campaigns, he said.
He also raised questions about the new disclosure amount of $25 and up, saying it’s too low and could create paper-trail headaches for candidates and officials. He thinks it might drive away some potential donors.
“In essence, you’re punishing that person’s individual right to contribute,” Monaco said during the meeting.
Monaco, however, was on the short end of a 3-1 majority on that consideration. Supervisor Richard Scagliotti stayed out of the debate.
Loe and Cruz argued there wouldn’t be much extra paperwork. And Loe said she concluded the limitation figures are appropriate after she researched previous campaigns’ spending.
“I did that, and that’s why I felt 25 (thousand) and 10 (thousand) were sufficient,” she told fellow board members.
However, some recent campaigns spent much more than those amounts. In the March election Supervisor-elect Jaime De La Cruz – who won the District 5 race by 10 votes – spent more than $15,000. And in the countywide battle over Measure G, campaigns for and against the land use initiative together raised and spent more than $400,000.
Such campaigns also would be governed by the new law, as would a recall effort; a group recently launched a campaign to remove District Attorney John Sarsfield from office.
Many candidates and officeholders have opposed the proposed law’s tight restrictions. It looks as though that won’t stop the board from an approval. At least three supervisors strongly back the reform.
The new board takes office in January, less than one month after an expected enactment of the ordinance.
With two and potentially three of the new members opposing aspects of the law, it’s unclear whether an ordinance would hold up until the next scheduled election in 2006.
De La Cruz said he’d have to study it further – while District 1 Supervisor-elect Don Marcus and District 2 candidates Anthony Botelho and Anthony Freitas have publicly questioned it.
Marcus isn’t opposed to a campaign finance reform. But he’s not sure whether $10,000 and $25,000 is enough, calling it “a little too stringent.” And he feels the $25 nondisclosure ceiling is too low.
“At this point, whatever this board establishes, I’ll try to support,” Marcus said, adding the incoming board could try the law and fix whatever needs fixing.
