TEMECULA: Temecula seeks election reporting revision
City officials ask Fair Political Practices Commission for help
By NICOLE SACK - Staff Writer | ∞
TEMECULA ---- City officials couldn't write the campaign disclosure ordinance they wanted, so instead they've written a letter.
The City Council is scheduled to sign off on a letter addressed to the state Fair Political Practices Commission in the council's meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive. The correspondence comes one month after the adoption of a city ordinance aimed at unmasking financing that comes from independent political action committees.
The council members, however, were disappointed to learn of the ordinance's limited scope. It does not have the power to require committees formed outside the city primarily for causes elsewhere to identify themselves and their spending if was funneled toward Temecula issues.
In the two-page letter, the council members decry current regulations for identifying contributors to local elections.
"In the past, it really hasn't been an issue. But the obscuring of the money trail in elections is becoming more prevalent," said Temecula Mayor Mike Naggar. "It's a loophole that needs to be closed, and one that circumvents the reporting requirements of the (Fair Political Practices Commission)."
As the law is written, a local jurisdiction is able to create more restrictive filing requirements only for candidates and committees active in that particular city or that exist primarily to support or oppose local candidates or ballot measures. That way one city wouldn't be able to write filing requirements that affect another city.
Therein lies the problem, as Temecula officials see it.
"A statewide or regional independent committee may make expenditures in a Temecula election that constitute only a very small percentage of its overall expenditures in the state, but could be a very significant expenditure in that Temecula election," the letter states. "The people of Temecula and other cities need the ability to determine who is making significant expenditures in their communities."
To close that loophole, Temecula officials are suggesting to the commission that the law should be amended to allow a campaign disclosure ordinance that would require disclosure by all committees that participate in local elections.
Roman Porter, executive director of the commission, said Temecula officials have a "valid point."
"This is a local government entity expressing its desire for information relative to who is spending money in their locality," Porter said. "I think the citizens have an absolute right to know who is spending that money. So if there is a way to make it easier to find out who is spending that money, it's something worth considering."
Roman said the commission would first investigate what kind of statutory authority it has on the issue and if it can work within the current structure of the law.
"It definitely doesn't get filed away," he said of the letter.
The next step, he said, would be to consider amendments to the Political Reform Act of 1974 that imposes campaign financing regulations on all state and local office holders and candidates.
"Absolute transparency in elections is better for everyone," Naggar said. "This is not just a Temecula issue. This should resonate up-and-down the state."
For any substantial change to occur in California's election laws, it would likely take action through a statewide voters' referendum or by the legislature. Those avenues do not inspire much optimism from Naggar.
"There's probably not a whole lot of motivation in Sacramento to cut off that milk flow," he said of regulating campaign contributions.
The City Council sought to pass a campaign disclosure ordinance that would require independent committees to file their financial information with the city clerk ---- as well as create tighter guidelines for reporting contributions and expenditures.
In contrast to fundraising committees formed by candidates themselves in support of their campaigns, independent political action committees can raise and spend money to promote their causes but cannot give money directly to candidates.
According to the city attorney, it is difficult for the public to obtain registration and disclosure statements filed by independent committees that favor or oppose City Council candidates or city issues if those groups are formed outside of the city. Such committees can be organized in any of the state's 58 counties and file their registration documents there. So unless a person knows where to look, it would be difficult to find out information about a committee's organization and activities.
Temecula's ordinance requires the disclosure of the identities of all contributors to City Council campaigns and requires any contribution of $100 or more to have been reported to the city clerk.
The ordinance was introduced April 22, but before its final approval, concerns from inside and outside of City Hall mounted over some of the provisions, such as one ---- now removed ---- that required candidates to offer written proof of any endorsements they claim. A clause that would have required candidates or groups to file campaign literature or fliers with the city clerk was also eliminated.
Violators of the ordinance could face misdemeanor prosecutions and administrative fines or civil action.
The ordinance was put into effect immediately, under the provisions of an "urgency" designation, so it would be in place before campaigns began in anticipation of the City Council election Nov. 4. Two council seats will be up for grabs as the terms of Mayor Mike Naggar and Councilman Chuck Washington are set to expire.
Candidates interested in running for City Council will be able to file with the city clerk during a four-week period that started July 14 and closes Aug. 8.
No candidates had yet filled for Temecula City Council race by Monday.
Contact staff writer Nicole Sack at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2616, or nsack@californian.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Good move wrote on Jul 21, 2008 11:21 PM:The council is setting a precedent for the rest of the state to follow. These PACS can spend a million dollars in a small city in complete anonymity. But this request from the city council has an equal effect on incumbents and challengers alike. Don't look for approval from Sacramento. Those voting in the state legislature aren't likely to cut their own throats. But Temecula is to be commended for trying to make PAC activity completely transparent, giving residents easy access to information on local election finance.
PACs DONT BOTHER wrote on Jul 21, 2008 11:26 PM:to come to Temecula to muck up our local elections! That includes YOU, Pechanga and Liberty Quarry!!
pathetic wrote on Jul 22, 2008 8:01 AM:Elected and city of Temecula officials should start unmasking *ALL* their own personal fortunes tied to developers. Constantly hiding behind the city attorney, and using bogus excuses as to why they are invested "just outside the city limits" is not cutting it. All staff should also have to disclose their investments with "certain" developers. The "Liberty Quarry" and "Pechanga" scare tactics are laughable. The real story is elected officials and staff tied to developers. Temecula has never had a problem with PACS but all of the sudden, when incumbants running for election are being scrutinized, the city wastes untold amounts of taxpayer dollars scaring us all with PAC fever.
CleanHouse wrote on Jul 22, 2008 8:57 AM:Pathetic sees through one motive of those running for re-election while Good Move continues to be a cheerleader for Temecula elected officials. There is nothing "completely transparent" about the motives for the ordinance.
Scorpion wrote on Jul 22, 2008 9:27 AM:Whether city council members have "ties to developers" or not seems irrelevant to THIS issue or question. How can more information about who is funding what campaigns ever be a bad thing? More information is always good when it comes to making decisions on candidates and ballot issues. Cynics (Hi, Al) suggest that this somehow benefits the incumbents. The only way I can see that is if the opponents intended to hide the source of their campaign donations behind some PAC somewhere. And as a voter, I want to know that. Just like if the council gets lots of money from "some developer" I want to know that, too.
Dear Sacramento wrote on Jul 22, 2008 9:30 AM:Oh boy! The council has “written a letter”. I bet this is how it reads:
Dear Fair Political Practices Committee,
The Temecula City Council has benefited greatly from their elected seats and desire to continue their terms. But there’s a mean ol’ group of ethical, savvy individuals who’ve discovered some truths about our personal dealings with developers over the years. While these financial dealings may appear as conflicts of interest, we can assure you that we are on the “legal” side because our city attorney said so. We need your help because two of our terms are expiring soon and we want the unfair advantage to poke our noses into the financial affairs of our opponents. You see, as long as we can hold our seats, we will be able to keep the private affairs of the city, i.e., deals that were made in closed session, from those who seek the truth. Please help us, Sacramento! The bad, ol’ truth-mongers are closing in.
Running Scared wrote on Jul 22, 2008 10:07 AM:Sounds like council members whose terms are soon to expire are running scared. What they should be concerned with is their image regarding conflicts of interest. I love the article's slant appearing to make the Council champions of social and political reform for "the people". Believe me, this is the most transparent effort at protecting their council seats and developer dealings. The entire region sees it. I challenge the Council to step outside of their crony circles and ask the real people of Temecula what they think. The public is weary of the posts from council members and their paid bloggers that appear on this site. Go pump your sunshine somewhere else!
Another Lame Idea wrote on Jul 22, 2008 11:06 AM:Golly, Council, you’ve opened up a can of worms! I guarantee your effort has ticked off every PAC this side of Sacramento. Talk about grandiose ideas from a simple little council. You can bet every PAC in the state is going to aggressively counter your scheme, which is going to make you look a bit foolish, don’t you think? Enough of the David and Goliath mentality. That only happens in storybooks. Be prepared for the backlash, just like your brilliant censorship idea. Duh and golly.
Easy Power wrote on Jul 22, 2008 1:54 PM:This is a really lame attempt to stifle political discourse. It has nothing to do with making the election playing field even, or fair or transparent. A incumbent has a head start from the git go, money,influence connections, and oragnization. From my point of view this on going flap about "tranparency" is nothing but a not so veiled attempt to control the election process by those in power.
Whats the Deal wrote on Jul 22, 2008 2:04 PM:What’s the big deal about PACs anyway? Aren’t their activities to raise campaign money just like any other politician or incumbent? So who cares whether the money is donated by individuals, corporations or falls out of the sky? The PACs still have to report. I’m getting a little suspicious why the Council believes this proposed ordinance is so urgent. Why do they insist on finding out where election opponents get their money? Are they worried about losing their seats to other responsible, committed Temeculans? Or are they afraid the tide is turning on the financial opportunities? My guess is that it's a budding campaign tactic against any opponents vying for a council seat in the upcoming election. Shame on those who would try to package this ordinance as a way to “protect” the citizens. Aren’t public service jobs intended to represent the people? What’s the deal?
Top PACs wrote on Jul 22, 2008 3:37 PM:Below are the top 10 PACs for 2007-2008. Some pretty heavy hitters, wouldn’t you say? Maybe they should be notified about this lame attempt by the Council to pass an ordinance that benefits ONLY council incumbents. Who’s the brainiac in this? Probably the same one who wanted to censor the media on city business.
National Assn of Realtor
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Operating Engineers Union
AT&T Inc
American Assn for Justice
National Beer Wholesalers Assn
National Auto Dealers Assn
Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union
International Assn of Fire Fighters
National Air Traffic Controllers Assn
PAC Man wrote on Jul 22, 2008 3:40 PM:Below are the top 10 PACs for 2007-2008. Some pretty heavy hitters, wouldn’t you say? Maybe they should be notified about this lame attempt by the Council to pass an ordinance that benefits ONLY council member incumbents. Who’s the brainiac in this? Probably the same one who wanted to censor the media on city business.
National Assn of Realtor
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Operating Engineers Union
AT&T Inc
American Assn for Justice
National Beer Wholesalers Assn
National Auto Dealers Assn
Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union
International Assn of Fire Fighters
National Air Traffic Controllers Assn
WOW wrote on Jul 23, 2008 12:15 AM:The thing that's most transparent is the one person who is spending all of his time trying to get revenge on the city because he was a complete failure in Old Town. The same lame chant, same lame claims. This ordinance would make it easier for Joe citizens like me to see exactly who's donating in our elections. Funny Al but the only reason you know about any donations to the incumbents from one local developer is because the incumbents DECLARED IT ON THEIR REQUIRED PAPERWORK!! Even the state Fair Policital Practices Commission said there was nothing illegal going on. AND that developer doesn't live in Temecula - doesn't work in Temecula - and has no projects in Temecula. Explain in legal terms how there is a conflict. You can't. There is no conflict and everything was properly daylighted and declared. Happy residents are getting pretty tired of your rants. Temecula is a fantastic place, and we are glad the city is trying to make all donors public.
Silly Season wrote on Jul 23, 2008 7:37 AM:Is Al afraid of this Ordinance because he doesn't want Temecula citizens to know how much money he is pouring into the election? Ever since Al's lame Old Town project(s) got the boot from the Council, he has been on this bloodthirsty crusade to oust them. If there were conflicts of any substance, how come the papers haven't continued to report it? There are no new news articles or other stories to substantiate his claimes. Why no investigations? Because there is no validity, that's why. Get a life! Rumor is not fact. Posting such here does not make it truth. He clearly has too much time on his hands if he can continue to post these comments pretending to be several different individuals. I can't wait for election season to be over so he will be revealed for the hypocrite that he is, and all these stupid accusations will cease, at least until the next election.
Not Al wrote on Jul 23, 2008 9:32 AM:Got news for WOW and Silly Season. It's not Al who's writing these posts. I've never met this Al person, but I've had 10 years of dealing closely with the City of Temecula. In fact, they'd be surprised who is posting. The only blood-thirsty, revenge-seeking individuals are certain council members. Man, could I tell you some stories about the way they work behind closed doors. Al's not the only developer they've screwed over. No investigation, you say? Uhh...right.
To Not Al wrote on Jul 23, 2008 11:25 AM:How is it that you happen to know about what occurs behind closed doors? If you have legitimate information, I for one am all ears. Please enlighten us.
Al wrote on Jul 23, 2008 11:31 AM:When you folks have nothing honest to say to qualify your position, you seem to fall back on this guy Al. Oldest trick in the political play book. If Al feels the way I feel about our elected officials and their sleezy attempt to control the press and the up coming election, more power to him. It is a old trick, wave the flag and blame the messenger
Council Ouster wrote on Jul 23, 2008 1:15 PM:I don’t know Al, but if it’s true that he’s raising funds to oust the Council, I say...it’s about time. This council’s got to go. Where can I send money to Al?
Its sad wrote on Jul 25, 2008 12:54 AM:That these posters lump all council members together in such a bad light. First, no one is guilty of anything, but you continue to bash everyone anyway - even the ones who never had any supposed conflicts. I don't get it. Why do you hate these people so much? What evidence do you have that the district attorney, the Fair Political Practices Commission and the newspapers don't know about. Anonymous claims with no substance are just liable and slander. You need to prove something or stop lying about them. If you had any proof, or if any of this were true, you'd show yourself and use your real name, only cowards hide in these columns. If it's as bad as you say, why do the papers say there is no conflict? If it's as bad as you say, why don't you bring the proof forward? Because you have no proof because those guys haven't done anything wrong. From now on, people should completely discount all accusations made in these anonymous columns. I will be.
To Its Sad wrote on Jul 25, 2008 5:42 PM:It is sad that a tight little bunch of Politicians can control a area as promising as the City Of Temecula with such arrogance and posturing. As for me, I don't hate any of our Council People, I just don't trust anyone of them. Whether what is being said is slander or liable will out in the end. Incidentaly, I notice that "It's Sad"has no identification next to his or her blog promoting the City. When you have a well financed Council, year after year rotating from Mayor to Mayor Pro-Tem back to Council person, you have what amounts to a fifedom. The reason these people keep getting elected is not many people have time to pay alot of attention to what's really going on. Busy lives, raising families take up a whole hell of a lot of time and politics has a low priority compared to family. Give a few groups and organiztions awards, be personable, and you can slide many issues right through the Consent calendar. It also allows a heavy influence of the Council by special interest groups that stand to make a ton of money if decisions go their way. To unseat our tight little group it will take money, dedication, and someone willing to run with the guts and backround to dodge the slings and arrows that will fly their way. Incidentally, "It's Sad", stop calling people who oppose you cowards ect. It shows lack of the ability to bring forthe a rational point without being vindictive
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement