Anaheim Ready to Curb Big-Bucks Campaigns : Reform: Proposal to put $1,000 cap on contributions to city candidates would greatly reduce the major role big givers have played in the past.

In this city where more than $1 million was recently raised to elect three council members and a mayor, officials are expected Tuesday to approve a reform that could dramatically reduce campaign contributions--by as much as one third.

The proposal would place a $1,000 limit per election on what a candidate may receive in cash or loans from any single contributor. The measure is patterned after a $1,000 limit approved by county voters last June for candidates seeking election to the Board of Supervisors.

“I think it’s the right time to do this,” Mayor Tom Daly said last week. “The time has come to put some type of limit on campaign” contributions.

However, there are those who think a $1,000 ceiling is too high, especially in a city the size of Anaheim, with a population of about 250,000. They note that the reform measure falls short of more stringent limitations existing in larger cities, such as San Diego and Los Angeles.

“I may be wrong, but I think (the limit) is going to hurt the little guy more,” said Sharon Ericson, president of the Anaheim Municipal Employees Assn., itself a major contributor to city election campaigns. Because incumbents meet the city’s major developers and business leaders, she said, they can raise money from more people and still receive more than a challenger.

In Anaheim, big campaign donors have long played a major role in local politics, according to a Times Orange County Edition computer analysis of City Council campaign contribution records.

Large contributors--those donating $1,000 or more to a single candidate--gave 56% of all the money raised by candidates for mayor and City Council from 1987 through 1990 (the most recent election cycle for which complete figures are available), the Times analysis shows. Councilman Fred Hunter, for example, raised 63% of his money during that period from donors who gave him $1,000 or more--a larger percentage than any other candidate.

More than 50 California cities have ordinances limiting campaign contributions, according to Robert Stern, executive director of the California Commission on Campaign Financing, a private, nonprofit group.

Stern said $1,000 is the highest limit, while some small cities have imposed ceilings as low as $50. The limits in most cities are either $250 or $500.

Shirley L. Grindle, a former county planning commissioner and reform activist who helped draft the new county campaign finance law, said Anaheim’s proposal doesn’t go far enough.

“One thousand dollars is the county supervisors’ (limit) and they have to run in districts that are many times larger than a city,” Grindle said. “I think $500 would be enough for a city like Anaheim.”

Both the proposed contribution limit in Anaheim and the county supervisors’ ceiling closely followed reports based on separate Times computer analyses, which showed that incumbents enjoy substantially greater financial backing than do challengers, and that special interests groups give hundreds of thousands of dollars to politicians who vote on measures affecting the donors.

“I think large contributions give the perception of influence,” Anaheim Councilman Bob D. Simpson said. “I don’t know whose vote can be bought and whose can’t. I just know we need to get rid of the perception that lobbyists can be heard and not the people.”

Anaheim voters approved an advisory ballot measure--Proposition H--last November by a 4 to 1 margin calling for a ceiling on campaign contributions. But in order for the reform to become law, the City Council must approve it.

In the wake of the overwhelming election results, each member of the City Council has indicated a willingness to follow through with some kind of reform. But not too quickly.

Even though the council intends to adopt the measure Tuesday, officials say they will delay implementation for five months, instead of the normal 30-day given most ordinances. The delay, they say, is necessary because Mayor Daly and Councilmen Hunter and Frank Feldhaus borrowed heavily during last fall’s heated campaign and their campaign treasuries remain several thousand dollars in debt. Each official hopes to raise money from contributors to pay off the debts before any limit is set.

Daly received a loan from a bank, Hunter from himself and Feldhaus from Councilman Irv Pickler.

“It wouldn’t be fair to change the rules when we have debt that was compiled before the rules went into effect,” Daly said. He also said July 1 is the beginning of the next reporting period for tracking campaign contributions.

Critics who feel the measure’s $1,000 limit is too high point to larger cities where the limit is much less.

In Los Angeles--where council members are elected from 15 districts that each have from 36,000 to 151,000 registered voters--there is a $500 donation limit for a City Council election. By comparison, Anaheim, which elects council members citywide, has only 108,000 registered voters.

In San Diego, a city of 1.1 million residents--four times the population of Anaheim--there is a $250 limit on contributions to the citywide mayor’s race. In addition, corporations, political action committees and labor unions are prohibited from making contributions. But in Anaheim those groups would be allowed to give up to $1,000 each, the same as individuals.

Anaheim would be the fifth Orange County city to adopt campaign finance limits. In Irvine the limit is $180, in San Juan Capistrano $250, in Huntington Beach $300 and in Fountain Valley $500.

Hunter, who has become the Anaheim council’s most outspoken campaign finance reform proponent after years of being one of the city’s largest fund-raisers, said winning campaigns were run in the early 1980s on as little as $30,000.

“It’s become uncontrollable, so we need to control it,” said Hunter, who raised more than $393,000 in two two-year election cycles in 1987-88 and 1989-90. “I think a limit of $250 would be better, but that wouldn’t pass.”

According to the Times computer analysis, even a $1,000 limit in Anaheim would have a significant impact on campaign financing. For example, if the $1,000 limit had been in effect for the 1987-1990 election cycle, $376,722 of the $1.1 million raised by seven City Council and mayor candidates would have been barred, the Times analysis shows.

A $1,000 limit would have substantially reduced Hunter’s finances in his most recent campaigns for council and mayor. More than 38% of Hunter’s campaign finances--a larger portion than any other candidate’s--would have been barred.

Of course, a $250 limit would have had a far more severe effect. Hunter, for example, would have been limited to only $34,895 during the 1987-90 election cycle, instead of the more than $393,000 he did raise.

A majority of Anaheim campaign donors already contribute less than the $1,000 limit. But the reform proposal would have a significant effect on scores of large contributors who have given $1,000 and more to a single candidate. During the 1987-90 election cycle, 227 contributors gave more than $1,000 to candidates for council and mayor.

Indeed, more than half--56%--of the money raised during that period came in donations of greater than $1,000.

Of the $10,900 contributed by the Elfend & Associates political consulting firm to then-Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood from 1987 through 1990, $9,900 would have been barred by a law limiting contributions to $1,000.

Campaign finance “limits help people’s perception of their government, but let’s face it, government has always been beholden to special interests and will always be beholden to special interests,” said Stern of the California Commission on Campaign Financing.

“Many of the large contributors will try to find ways around the law,” Stern predicted, “so any limit’s effectiveness depends on its enforcement. Some contributors will try to ‘launder’ their money through third parties,” which is illegal.

“After Los Angeles passed its law,” Stern noted, “we found that there was an incredibly large number of maids and 7-year-olds who started giving campaign contributions.”

Anaheim Proposal at a Glance Candidates may accept no more than $1,000 in contributions or loans from any donor per election. Possible contributors include individuals, political action committees, corporations, businesses and labor unions. Husbands and wives may make contributions of $1,000 each to a candidate. Donations made by children under 18 count against their parents’ limit. A business and its majority owner may not give more than $1,000 combined to a candidate. Business partners may not give more than $1,000 combined to a candidate. Candidates may give unlimited amounts to their own campaigns.

Limit Would Slash Contributions

If the proposed $1,000 campaign contribution limit had been in effect during the 1987-1990 cycle for Anaheim municipal elections, it would have reduced the amount of money raised by all candidates by nearly one-third.

Amount Percentage Total exceeding exceeding contributions $1,000 $1,000 Irv Pickler $462,311 $140,652 30.4 Fred Hunter 393,619 152,146 38.6 Miriam Kaywood 147,953 41,925 28.3 Bob D. Simpson 97,024 33,749 34.8 Jo Ann Barnett 29,810 7,250 24.3 Frank Feldhaus 27,274 1,000 3.7 Total $1,157,991 $376,722 32.5

Note: Amounts do not include contributions or loans candidates made to their own campaigns. Such contributions would not be regulated by the proposed reform.

BIG CONTRIBUTOR FACTOR

Contributors who gave $1,000 or more to a single candidate played a significant role in financing Anaheim City Council and mayoral campaigns during the 1987-90 election cycle. More than half the money was given in contributions of $1,000 or more.

Contributions Percentage of Total of $1,000 $1,000 or more contributions or more contributions Irv Pickler $462,311 $251,652 54.4 Fred Hunter 393,619 249,146 63.3 Miriam Kaywood 147,953 73,925 50.0 Bob D. Simpson 97,024 60,149 62.0 Jo Ann Barnett 29,810 12,250 41.1 Frank Feldhaus 27,274 2,000 7.3 Total $1,157,991 $649,122 56.1

Note: Amounts do not include contributions or loans candidates made to their own campaigns. Such contributions would not be regulated by the proposed reform.

TOP CONTRIBUTORS

During Anaheim’s 1987-90 election cycle, City Council candidates received contributions in excess of $1,000 from a single donor 227 times. Here are the contributors who gave most in excess of $1,000.

Total Contributor Candidate contribution Elfend & Associates (lobbyist) Miriam Kaywood $10,900 Service Employees International Union Bob D. Simpson 10,000 Newport Pacific Realty & Investment Miriam Kaywood 9,100 Morinello Barone Holden Miriam Kaywood 9,000 & Nardulli (law firm) William Taormina (waste hauler) Miriam Kaywood 8,500 Walt Disney Co. Fred Hunter* 8,000 Caliber Motors Inc. (car dealership) Miriam Kaywood 7,500 Newport Pacific Development Irv Pickler* 7,500 Baldwin Builders Miriam Kaywood 7,250 William Taormina Fred Hunter** 7,250

* 1989 and 1990

** 1987 and 1988

Note: Unless noted, contributions are for the four-year election cycle, 1987-1990.

Source: Anaheim city election campaign contribution reports