Santa Cruz Good Times

Saturday
Jul 04th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Money In Politics

news1-1-1Santa Cruz City Council candidates express different views on campaign fundraising

On the national level, campaign spending continues to escalate to mind-bending levels. And with the 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United ruling that removed all financial limits to corporate contributions, the financial arms race for candidates has become increasingly controversial.

According to the Washington Post, presidential candidate Mitt Romney was leading President Barack Obama in campaign fundraising in late August, $185.9 million to $123.7 million. The forthcoming election will be the most expensive on record, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

In June of 2000, in an effort to avert similar, though on a much smaller scale, escalation in local elections, the City of Santa Cruz enacted a voluntary spending cap on candidate fundraising. But in the current election cycle, candidates for Santa Cruz City Council differ in their views about raising money in local elections. Some have signed on to the city's spending cap treaty, while others have opted out.

The city's policy is to encourage local candidates to agree to its overall spending cap, which was set at $26,640.65 this year. The city also limits contributions from individuals to $325 and contributions from organizations to $780, which all candidates have agreed to.

The city incentivizes candidates to limit their fundraising by featuring their photo and a short statement on the city's website if they agree to do so. Regardless, Councilwoman Lynn Robinson says that, in her experience, opting to raise more money is the more viable plan of action for serious candidates.

Four of the council's seven seats will open this November as Councilmen Ryan Coonerty and Tony Madrigal term-out and Mayor Don Lane and Councilwoman Katherine Beiers end their four-year terms.

Eight candidates, including incumbent Lane and former three-time mayor and four-term councilwoman Cynthia Mathews, are vying for the seats. Six have agreed to campaign under the spending limit, stating desires to make the election process less about financial competition.

Candidates Jake Fusari, Cynthia Mathews, Don Lane, Cece Pinheiro, Steve Pleich and Micah Posner have all signed the agreement to spend no more than $26,640.65 each.

Newcomer candidates Richelle Noroyan and Pamela Comstock have chosen to not limit their fundraising because they say it would impede their ability to communicate with voters.

A leading argument against agreeing to the spending cap is that it gives the upper hand to incumbents, who have already established their names and policy ideas among voters.

news1 2Santa Cruz City Council candidate Jake Fusari (right) plans to stick to the voluntary campaign fundraising cap, and says he most likely won't come near that amount. Instead, he's focusing on creative approaches to getting his name and message out to voters. In the last election for council, the three candidates who received the most votes went over the voluntary spending cap.

The top vote getter was Vice Mayor Hilary Bryant, with 22.52 percent of the votes. She both raised the most money—$45,087—and spent the most—$43,375. Robinson, who came in second with 21.70 percent of votes, raised $30,845 and spent $25,691.

Councilman David Terrazas raised and spent $35,474—almost $10,000 more than Robinson—but came in close behind with 20.28 percent of the votes cast.

In 2010, candidate Ron Pomerantz abided by the cap, raising $23,316 and spending $21,986, but did not win, receiving just 12.96 percent of the vote.

Robinson says that limiting themselves to the current fundraising cap is not realistic for candidates who are serious about winning.

“The ideals of that policy,” she says, referring to the cap, “and the reality of what it takes to have a winning campaign are becoming further apart. You have to recognize what it takes in terms of costs to run a campaign. If you don't raise enough money, you've limited your ability to reach voters.”

Councilman Ryan Coonerty, elected to two terms in 2004 and 2008, raised about $45,000 in each election and spent $36,926 in the second. 

“The expenditure limit is well intentioned,” he says, “but I think it has unintended consequences.”

He says the cap gives incumbents a big advantage and limits a candidate's ability to tell voters what they plan to do in office. He does not believe that candidates should be allowed unlimited spending, but that the cap should be increased. Money spells communication in the context of an election, he says, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a problem. He suggests that the city finance the whole process so that candidates can focus entirely on community and policy.

Current candidate Pleich, who is abiding by the cap, believes that allowing money to do the talking has corrupted the national election process.

Posner, who recently stepped down as director at the sustainable transportation nonprofit People Power to run for council, is a strong advocate of spending limits. Without limits, he says money is wasted and elections can potentially go to candidates who are the best fundraisers but do not have the best policies.

“I think [limits are] an ethical approach,” he says. “There have to be boundaries in politics.”

Without limits, he says candidates will inevitably try to raise more money than their opponents, not unlike countries scrambling for weapons in an arms race. It will not matter how much money a candidate spends, just who spends the most.

“At what point is it enough money in an election?” Posner asks.

First time candidate Pinheiro, who is also abiding by the limits, says allowing money to have too much influence on campaigns takes away from the true purpose of the election process: to elect good leaders.

“Those who don't limit themselves want to win more than they want to play fair,” Pinheiro says. “You should not have to spend that much money if you're willing to do the work.”

First time candidate Fusari will abide by the cap and says he does not believe he will even come close to the limit. He plans to put his background in business marketing to work and find more cost-efficient and creative ways to reach voters. For example, he designed his own campaign signs and is focusing on using social media tools to communicate his goals.

“Santa Cruz is not a huge community,” he says. “Our voters can be reached without spending huge quantities of money.”

Mathews is an example of a candidate who campaigned within the spending limits and still won a seat on the council.

However, when asking Mathews, who helped to pass the spending ordinance while on the council, what it actually accomplishes, she replies, “It doesn't do an awful lot by not being mandatory.”

Newcomer candidates Pamela Comstock and Richelle Noroyan have chosen not to limit their campaign expenditures, each citing the need to get their names out to voters.

“Because I'm new to the political scene, I feel I need more money to market myself,” Comstock says.

She plans to raise about $30,000. That will go to signage, mailers, advertising in local media and things like shirts, stickers and buttons, she says.

Noroyan aims to raise between $28,000 and $30,000.

“If you're someone who has served on the council for many years and you already have that name recognition, perhaps $26,640 is realistic,” she says. “But if you're someone who's new, you may need to spend a little more money.”

Incumbent Don Lane, elected to term in 2008, raised $21,220 and spent $20,081. Today he is campaigning under a lower contribution limit than the city has set for candidates: $250 per individual and $600 per organization.

“The role of money in the larger political system of the country has made people cynical about the idea that they have a real say in what goes on in elections and their government,” Lane says.

He adds that by further lowering his own contribution limits, it forces him to broaden his base of support and raise smaller amounts of money from more people.

“I think that's healthier for the system,” he says.   

Comments (2)Add Comment
...
written by Charles Cheatham - Owner of the Casablanca Inn and Bistro, September 24, 2012
We give our full endorsement and confidence to Mayor Don Lane, who we feel truly cares about the City of Santa Cruz and its people. He has been very supportive to the local businesses in our city which has helped all of us tremendously. We look forward to another term for him to further implement his wonderful and worthwhile projects. More power to you Mayor Lane, and our very best wishes to you always...
...
written by Voter Beware, September 07, 2012
Interesting blend of new candidates. I wish their backgrounds would be explored more deeply than 1-2 marketing blurbs. I sense agendas that are not about our city. Maybe that;'s the norm in a council race.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

Share this on your social networks

Bookmark and Share

Share this

Bookmark and Share

 

The Boards Are Back in Town

More than a century after a famed trio of Hawaiian princes first surfed in Santa Cruz, their redwood olo surfboards are returning to the Museum of Art & History

 

We Hold These Truths to Be Self-Evident

Saturday, July 4, is the 239th birthday of the United States, commemorating the signing of the Declaration of Independence (the U.S. astrology chart has Aquarius moon—freedom for its people, by its people). Cancer, a liberating and initiating sign, is the “gate” where Spirit enters matter. Cancer receives and distributes Ray 3 (Divine Intelligence) and Ray 7 (new rules, new rhythms, new free nation under God). Cancer represents an intelligent freethinking humanity that can and must create right economics for the world. This means a policy of sharing, an opportunity for the U.S. when Venus (money, resources, possessions, etc.) retrogrades July and August in Leo (the heart of the matter). The United States has a unique spiritual task for the world: to lead humanity within and toward the light, accomplished by its people who must first awaken to this task, learn discrimination and be directed by the soul to assume the Herculean task of spiritual world leadership. Let us review the first words of our Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.” Let us form that union together. The following is a review of the spiritual tasks for each sign. Read all the signs. They all apply to everyone.  

 

The New Tech Nexus

Community leaders in science and technology unite to form web-based networking program

 

Film, Times & Events: Week of July 3

Santa Cruz area movie theaters >
Sign up for Good Times weekly newsletter
Get the latest news, events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Lunch is Packed

Picnic basket lunches from Your Place, plus smoked chili peppers, and new owners at Camellia Tea House

 

What would you like the Supreme Court to rule on next?

Raising the minimum wage so that those that are in poverty now can have a higher standard of life. Greanna Smith, Soquel, Nanny

 

Bruzzone Family Vineyards

Bruzzone Family Vineyards is a small operation run by Berna and John Bruzzone. Starting out a few years ago making only Chardonnay, they eventually planted Pinot Noir on their extensive property and now make this varietal as well.

 

Ty’s Eatery

Pop-up hooks up with Santa Cruz Food Lounge for healthy comfort food