Oil-Drilling Fight War Chests Pass $8.7-Million Total

In what is believed to be the most expensive election battle in city history, rival forces have so far raised more than $8.7 million to pass competing oil drilling measures Proposition O and Proposition P on the Nov. 8 ballot.

Bolstered by a whopping $900,000 contribution from state Controller Gray Davis, the Proposition O forces have collected a respectable $2.4 million for their anti-drilling campaign. The hefty gift came from funds that Davis, under new campaign spending laws, is barred from using in a possible race for governor in 1990.

But the $2.4-million anti-drilling fund was dwarfed by the $6.3-million raised by Occidental Petroleum Corp. on behalf of Proposition P. The pro-drilling measure seeks to protect the 1985 city approval of Occidental’s Pacific Palisades drilling plans.

According to the new statements, Occidental has pumped in more than $6.1 million, or 97% of the total raised for Proposition P, and has spent $4.6 million so far. The record amount raised by the oil company prompted a strong attack by the anti-drilling campaign.

“Occidental Petroleum has spent enough to win a statewide election and people should reject their blatant attempt to buy our coastline,” said Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, a Proposition O co-sponsor. “We expect they will be contributing $1 million every day between now and the election at the rate they’re going.”

Occidental attorney Mickey Kantor noted that the anti-drilling forces had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on television time, but he would not say how much the oil company was willing to spend to pass the controversial measure.

“The salient issue is not how much anyone spends, but whether or not the voters are willing to accept the arguments,” Kantor said. Kantor added that one reason Occidental spent so much was because the Proposition P campaign anticipated that Controller Davis would be providing a major financial boost to the anti-drilling measure.

Davis’ $900,000 gift is drawn from his $1-million-plus campaign treasury hit hard by recent passage of the statewide campaign spending-limit measure, Proposition 73. The $900,000 represents nearly 40% of the $2.4 million raised so far by anti-drilling forces and more than half of the $1.7 million collected between Oct. 1 and Oct. 21, according to the new spending reports.

Passed overwhelmingly in June, Proposition 73 precludes Davis from spending $1.2 million he had raised either for reelection or for a possible run for governor in 1990. After Jan. 1, the controller and other statewide elected officials are barred from using existing campaign funds for themselves or other candidates.

While unable to spend the $900,000 on a 1990 gubernatorial bid, Davis nevertheless has apparently found a way to turn the funds to his long-term political advantage. He is currently appearing in two of five Proposition O television commercials and his huge donation earned him a campaign co-chairmanship with Los Angeles City Councilmen Yaroslavsky and Marvin Braude.

In a statement, Davis said his sizable contribution--the largest received so far by the anti-drilling campaign--is to help “protect all of California’s coast, and that means stopping the Occidental drilling project.”

Elected in 1986, Davis has parlayed the otherwise low-profile statewide job into one that has attracted publicity, particularly by the controller’s activities on the State Lands Commission, which he now chairs. In that position, Davis has fought against offshore drilling and for other environmental issues. As an assemblyman representing a Westside district, Davis also has a record of opposing the Occidental drilling project.

Davis’ political allies said that his heavy involvement in Proposition O was partially designed to promote his environmental record in Los Angeles, the state’s largest city. But equally important to Davis is drawing a clear distinction on the environmental front between himself and fellow Democrat Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp, these allies said. Both Davis and Van de Kamp have been widely mentioned as possible candidates for governor in 1990.

Despite repeated requests by anti-drilling forces, Van de Kamp has not taken a public position on either Proposition O or Proposition P. A Van de Kamp spokesman said the attorney general has no plans to get involved in the drilling controversy.

In an interview, Yaroslavsky said Davis would have served in a prominent role in the campaign regardless of any monetary contribution because of his environmental record and his position as controller. He noted that “long before” Davis’ $900,000 contribution on Oct. 3, the controller had endorsed the anti-drilling measure and helped qualify it for the ballot.

“Davis certainly had more than one option of what he could do with that money,” Yaroslavsky said. “That he chose to invest it in a battle to save the coast and to taking on a major corporate player (Occidental), a major contributor to political campaigns in this state, is to his credit.”

Substantial Contribution

But Yaroslavsky conceded that without Proposition 73, it is unlikely there would have been such a substantial contribution from Davis’ coffers.

“If Proposition 73 had not come in, I don’t think any elected official would empty his campaign fund for an initiative when (the money) could be used for elected office,” Yaroslavsky said. “That goes without saying.”

Other Major Donors

Besides Davis, the major Proposition O contributors in the latest campaign statements include film producer Jerry Perenchio ($225,000), CoastFed Properties ($35,000) and Mayer Management Inc., musician Herb Alpert and actor Ted Danson ($25,000 each). Danson has given a total of $35,000 to the campaign.

As for the Proposition P campaign, the only significant contribution besides that of Occidental in the latest reports was a $1,500 gift from the Los Angeles Police Protective League. Three other contributions totaled $35.

In other campaign-related developments:

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Eric Younger upheld the 1987 decision by the California Coastal Commission granting Occidental Petroleum Corp. the right to drill two exploratory wells at a two-acre Pacific Palisades site. The company would still need a production permit from the commission.

Los Angeles City Atty. James K. Hahn’s office notified Braude and Yaroslavsky that it will probably not pursue civil relief against the Proposition P campaign. The two councilman had asked prosecutors to stop the pro-drilling campaign from soliciting voter absentee ballot applications instead of having them sent directly to the registrar-recorder.

Assistant City Atty. Claude Hilker said his office has not determined whether any criminal sanctions will be sought against those responsible for sending voters what apparently was a defective ballot application form.