City Proposals Aim to Limit Power of Interest Groups : Elections: Mayor says she wants to prevent the possibility that ‘a seat can be bought and sold by a particular interest or a wealthy individual.’

Two council members have proposed a code of ethics and a campaign finance reform measure in an attempt to keep big money out of their small-town elections.

Mayor Carol Churchill and Councilman Richard Ceccia, disturbed that thousands of dollars poured into last year’s election from outside the city, have proposed changes in campaign laws. The City Council will discuss the proposals at a meeting Tuesday night.

Churchill has proposed a voluntary code of ethics that would bar council members and planning commissioners from voting or discussing any issue that would affect a contributor. And Ceccia said he would like the council to discuss a mandatory cap on how much money candidates may accept from political action committees.

“What I want to prevent,” Churchill said, “is (the potential) that, in a small city like Signal Hill, a seat can be bought and sold by a particular interest or a wealthy individual.”

Signal Hill used to be the kind of town where candidates could win elections by knocking on lots of doors. It didn’t take much money or fancy flyers, just some sturdy shoes and a willingness to gab with strangers.

But the political climate in this town of about 8,000 residents has changed.

Last year, Churchill and others accused Southwest Diversified Inc., a development company that has a 450-unit project pending in the city, of attempting to influence the election by indirectly funneling money to several candidates. The company initially wanted to build about 1,200 homes in the area that the locals call “the hilltop,” but the plan was trimmed by the City Council.

Southwest denied trying to influence the election, but campaign finance statements showed that the Orange County-based developer donated $27,500 to a political action committee called Southern California Caucus.

The political action committee, in turn, donated $10,000 to Concerned Citizens of Signal Hill, a neighborhood group that campaigned heavily for candidates who said they were willing to renegotiate the Southwest development plan. Two of those candidates supported by Concerned Citizens, Michael Noll and Sara Hanlon, won the election.

Noll and Hanlon said they were unaware of the indirect contributions by Southwest, and officials from the development company said they had done nothing illegal.

But Churchill and Ceccia, the only slow-growth advocate to get reelected last year, said Southwest circumvented the city’s strict campaign finance limits. In Signal Hill, candidates are not allowed to accept more than $250 from any source--including PACs--during a four-year period.

Because Southwest’s project is still pending, Churchill and Ceccia said they want to ensure that next year’s election is not influenced by outside cash.

Churchill proposes that every planning commissioner and City Council member sign a voluntary declaration promising to withdraw from participating or voting on any issue involving a contributor. And the mayor has asked the city attorney to broaden the definition of contributor to include any party that donates money or services through a third party.

“I want the definition of contributor broadened so we can avoid what happened here last year,” Churchill said.

“I want people to see that when the council votes, they’re voting for what’s best for the community,” Churchill said, “not because of who contributed to their campaign coffers.”

Churchill’s proposal, however, is not expected to be greeted with enthusiasm by all her colleagues. Councilman Noll, for example, criticized the proposal as unwieldy.

“A lot of times contributors will donate $10 or $15,” Noll said. “Something may come up that affects them or their neighborhood. How in the world if you have all these different people, can you keep track of it?”

He said the measure is unnecessary because Signal Hill already “has one of the more controlled campaign finance limits.”

The council also is scheduled to discuss whether the city needs to change its campaign finance laws. Ceccia said he wants a proposal that would limit donations to any group by PACs to $250.

“Let’s face it, the bottom line is that the only reason people give money to a politician is to get their vote. It’s not to ‘get their ear.’ You’ll hear that all the time,” Ceccia said. “If a PAC is going to give money, they should be restricted to the same amount as a Signal Hill resident.”