6 County Officials Back New Limit on Contributions : Politics: The assessor, recorder, auditor-controller, treasurer-tax collector, schools superintendent and county clerk endorse the plan.

Six of Orange County’s top elected officials endorsed a proposed cap on political contributions Friday, even though it would limit the money that they could raise to run for reelection.

“I think it’s very appropriate,” County Clerk Gary Granville said. “I’ve read through it, and I don’t find anything in it that I have any problem with at all.”

The Board of Supervisors is to decide soon whether to let voters consider a plan proposed by local activists this week to impose a limit on all campaign contributions to county candidates.

The proposed ordinance would apply to the five supervisors, as well as to Granville and eight other elected officials. Orange County has never before imposed local regulations on campaign fund-raising for those nine offices, and the proposal would for the first time limit contributors to giving $1,000 to a single candidate during a four-year election cycle.

Candidates who faced a runoff could raise an additional $1,000 per contributor.

Even though that would end the unregulated fund-raising potential of locally elected officials, six of the nine who would come under the proposed ordinance said in interviews Friday that they support the $1,000 cap. One of the six, Schools Supt. John F. Dean, added that he would like to review the plan’s specifics before staking out a formal position.

Former Orange County Planning Commissioner Shirley L. Grindle, who has spearheaded the campaign-reform effort, said she was pleased to have the support of most of the county’s top elected leaders.

“I consider it very commendable of them to recognize the overriding need to limit campaign contributions,” she said. “Political fund-raising should not just be an open-ended book. There needs to be some limits, and I’m glad that they recognize that.”

Sheriff Brad Gates is the only elected official in Orange County who has openly opposed the proposal, arguing that it unfairly restricts citizens from giving their full support to candidates of their choice.

The remaining two affected officials, Dist. Atty. Michael R. Capizzi and Public Administrator William A. Baker, were unavailable for comment Friday. Capizzi has previously indicated that he supports the concept of a contribution limit, but he has not publicly addressed the specific proposal given to the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.

Of the officials who have reviewed the proposal, however, nearly all were quick to back it.

“This whole business of raising money for campaigns--I don’t care what office it is--it has just gotten obscene,” said Treasurer-Tax Collector Robert Citron. “I think you have to have a limit.”

Auditor-Controller Steve E. Lewis agreed.

“Something needs to be done in this area,” he said. “It’s out of control.”

Other officials said that they did not have such strong feelings on the matter, but they were generally supportive.

Recorder Lee A. Branch, for instance, said he had no objections to the proposal and found a $1,000 limit was appropriate. County Assessor Bradley L. Jacobs said that he, too, supports the idea, adding: “I have thought from time to time that such limits were needed.”

The nine elected county officials received their copies of the proposed ordinance this week from Board of Supervisors Chairman Gaddi H. Vasquez.

The supervisors themselves are studying the proposal and have referred it to the county counsel’s office for a legal opinion. That is likely to be completed sometime next month, and the supervisors are expected to vote in the coming weeks on whether to put the issue on the June ballot. Four of the five supervisors have already voiced tentative support for the plan.

Grindle has asked for a decision by the board before Jan. 15, and several supervisors have said they believe that deadline can be met easily.