Politicking Ban Sought for Nonprofit Groups Leasing Space on Parkland

A San Diego City Council committee, attempting to settle a dispute over politicking by the local chapter of the Sierra Club, Wednesday proposed banning all political activity by any nonprofit organization that leases city-owned offices on parkland.

The policy change, considered by the council’s Public Facilities and Recreation Committee, would go so far as to prevent nonprofit organizations in Balboa Park from working for the passage of ballot initiatives designed to raise money for the park.

Irony of Situation Noted

Ironically, many members of Balboa Park cultural institutions campaigned for a 1987 campaign to raise as much as $93.5 million for renovations in Balboa and Mission Bay parks--at the request of the City Council and the committee running the campaign.

The institutions themselves chipped in $150 apiece to help pay for a public opinion poll as the campaign began and held meetings in city-owned offices in Balboa Park, all of which would be prohibited by the new policy.

Current policy prohibits nonprofit groups leasing offices from the city from working for a political candidate. The San Diego Business Journal touched off debate about the Sierra Club when, in recent articles, it accused the environmental group’s leaders of meeting in city-owned office space in Balboa Park to review an endorsement made by the organization’s political arm.

Local Sierra Club leaders conceded Wednesday that the meeting was held in the city-owned office space.

At a July meeting, the council committee considered ousting the Sierra Club from its offices in the House of Hospitality because its status under the federal tax code allowed some politicking.

The new policy, drafted by Deputy City Manager Maureen Stapleton and amended by District 6 Councilman Bruce Henderson, would allow the Sierra Club to stay and retain its 19-year-old lease if leaders agreed to abide by the stricter rules and would extend the prohibition to ballot initiatives.

“Nobody is singling out the Sierra Club,” Henderson said. “All we’re saying is we don’t want to lease to organizations that want to engage in prohibited lobbying or any prohibited political campaigns.”

Ron Ottinger, chairman of the Sierra Club’s political arm, said the group “could live with” the new proposal but predicted the full council would not approve it.

“It’s crazy,” he said. “It seems to me that if you have a park bond issue, you want (organizations such as) the zoo to help you out.”

District 8 Councilman Bob Filner, another committee member, criticized the proposed policy for similar reasons and argued that the policy’s definition of “political activities” is too vague. Filner predicted “a series of witch hunts” because, “someone is going to say ‘that organization is engaging in political activity.’ One person’s political activities is another person’s good works.”

‘Not Strict Enough’

But District 7 Councilwoman Judy McCarty argued that the proposal is not strict enough. McCarty wants to prohibit leases of city-owned space to any group engaged in political activity, even if that activity takes place outside the city-owned offices.

Dick Bundy--chairman of an organization representing 23 cultural institutions in Balboa Park’s core--said his members probably will not oppose the ban because their federal tax status prohibits most forms of political activity anyway.

“The bond issue was a once-in-every-20-years type of thing,” said Bundy, chairman of the Central Balboa Park Assn. “If there is a law in force, it helps us if the IRS comes back and challenges our (nonprofit tax) status.”

Still to be decided when the policy comes back for reconsideration Sept. 14, Stapleton said, is whether the ban should be extended to groups leasing city-owned space not in a park.

Excluding the Balboa Park cultural institutions and the zoo, 46 of the 73 nonprofit organizations that lease space from the city have their offices outside parks, said Dick Randolph, the city’s supervising property agent.