Cities Weigh Campaign Finance Laws : Government: Debate resurfaces on whether strict limits should be placed on contributions.

The passage of the county’s toughest campaign finance law by Ventura voters this week has touched off a fresh debate among leaders from Thousand Oaks to Oxnard on whether their cities should adopt similar measures.

In Thousand Oaks, Councilwoman Elois Zeanah said Friday she plans to bring the issue before the council before the end of the month. “I think this is an excellent model.”

And in Oxnard, Mayor Manuel Lopez said he would like to see campaign contribution limits as well.

But other officials in those cities, as well as in Simi Valley and Camarillo, say Ventura’s tough new law is overly restrictive and that they see no need to adopt similar ordinances.

Ventura’s law, which was approved by 81% of the city’s voters Tuesday, limits campaign donations to candidates to $100 per donor. If a candidate agrees not to exceed a $20,000 ceiling on campaign contributions, the candidate can accept donations as high as $200 per donor.

Ventura’s law has another unusual feature: Donors contributing $25 or more to a candidate must disclose their name, address, occupation and employer. Before Tuesday’s election, candidates could accept undisclosed donations of up to $99.

Ventura City Councilman Steve Bennett said he wrote the ordinance to prevent special interest groups and wealthy contributors from pouring money into city elections in which they might profit from favorable decisions.

He said the ordinance will decrease the skyrocketing cost of campaigns, making it easier for lesser-known candidates to be competitive. He said he believes it will also help council members be less susceptible to the political pressure of big donors.

“Common sense says you cannot stay objective about somebody or some project if you have received a large contribution from them,” said Bennett, who took in about $17,800 in donations during his 1993 race.

But critics say the new ordinance creates layers of bureaucracy that will discourage candidates from running for office. And they contend that the law favors incumbents and hurts candidates without name recognition.

“I think it is a simplistic approach to a complicated problem,” said outgoing Ventura Councilman Gregory Carson, the top vote-getter in 1991 who took in more than $24,300 on his campaign--the most of any candidate that year. “It is going to be very cumbersome.” Councilman-elect Jim Friedman, who was the top money-raiser this year with $22,733 in contributions, believes the law will make it difficult for lesser-known candidates.

“It’s going to make it a lot easier for incumbents and it is going to make it easy for people who maybe do not have a full-time job and can spend time raising money $25 at a time. . . . I don’t know if that is good.”

Ventura and Oakland are the only California cities to adopt this type of contribution limits, although similar restrictions are now being considered in San Francisco, Long Beach and Monterey, said Craig Holman, a senior researcher for the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles.

“The idea is spreading like wildfire,” Holman said. “Voters in California are dying for campaign finance reform.”

Bennett worked with Holman to draft the ordinance, which is similar to a statewide campaign finance reform initiative that the League of Women Voters and other proponents are now trying to qualify for the November, 1996, ballot.

“It sounds like it is comparable to statewide limits being proposed for next year,” said Gary Huckaby, a spokesman for the Fair Political Practices Commission in Sacramento. In campaigns for state office, he said, “there are no limits.”

*

Ventura County also has its own contribution limits for candidates seeking county offices.

Under county law, candidates can receive up to $750 from individuals and businesses in the June primary and no more than $250 in the general election. They can also accept as much as $1,800 from political action committees in the primary and $600 in the general election.

In December, Bennett asked his fellow council members to adopt a measure limiting contributions for City Council races. After much debate, the council decided to place it on the November ballot.

Originally, Bennett’s proposal required every candidate to be audited by a certified public accountant after a city election. The City Council refused to place the measure on the ballot with that provision, so Bennett dropped it.

Ventura’s law, known as Measure H on Tuesday’s ballot, was approved overwhelmingly by the city’s voters--signaling public concern about the influence of money on politics.

“Everybody wants campaign reform, I guess,” said Bruce Bradley, head of the county’s elections division. “I think people would like to see less money spent.”

Bennett questioned whether his ordinance, which goes into effect Jan. 1, would catch on in other cities in Ventura County.

“I am not certain that it will because it is going to take elected officials to push it in each city,” he said. “There are not a lot of politicians fired up about it.”

But some politicians said they want similar reforms.

Zeanah pushed for campaign contribution limits in Thousand Oaks last spring. The council was split 2 to 2 on the issue at the time, and a frustrated Zeanah gave up on breaking the stalemate until after the June special election seated a fifth council member.

“I think it is time to put it back on the agenda,” Zeanah said Friday. “I think that now that Ventura has so overwhelmingly voted for campaign reform . . . we can see the handwriting on the wall. We, as city leaders, should provide the essential leadership.”

*

But other Thousand Oaks officials questioned whether their city would benefit from such restrictions.

“We have no evidence of needing campaign reform in Thousand Oaks,” said Councilman Andy Fox. “We don’t have a problem.”

Thousand Oaks Councilwoman Judy Lazar said she would not object to contribution limits if the restrictions would also limit how much money a candidate can contribute to his or her own campaign.

“You can just buy an election,” Councilman Mike Markey said. “I have some strong reservations unless you can control the candidates themselves, but you can’t do that.”

Legally, candidates cannot be restricted in how much of their own money they spend.

In Simi Valley, city leaders said restrictions such as those in Ventura are unlikely to be approved in their town.

“People are being sold a bill of goods,” Simi Valley Councilwoman Sandi Webb said. “I think it is ridiculous.”

Simi Valley Mayor Greg Stratton doubts if Ventura’s law would have its desired effects.

“The two things I have noticed about campaign limits is there is always somebody who finds a way to get around them. And two, they are pro-incumbent and they tend to encourage the idle rich because there is no limit on how much money you can put into your own campaign,” he said.

In Camarillo, a city roughly half the size of Simi Valley, Councilman Ken Gose said city races are much less expensive and thus contribution limits are unnecessary. “I see no need whatsoever in Camarillo,” he said.

Leaders in Fillmore and Ojai also believe that campaign finance reform is unwarranted in their small cities, where candidates draw few hefty contributions.

In Moorpark, where former Councilman Scott Montgomery pleaded guilty last month to a felony conflict of interest charge for accepting $3,500 from a waste hauler, city officials have not discussed changing their campaign contribution regulations.

“I am not aware of any move afoot,” said Moorpark Councilman Pat Hunter.

Regardless of the monetary amount, Hunter said he believes it is candidates’ responsibility to decide what contributions are appropriate to accept.

“There has got to be some common-sense decision on the part of the candidates whether this contribution would have some conflict down the road,” he said.

In Oxnard, Mayor Manuel Lopez told the council in May that he wanted to diminish the growing mistrust of government and erase the perception that developers can buy clout in the city.

In 1993, two promoters of a proposed Oxnard card club were found guilty of violating state law for indirectly giving small contributions of less than $99 to two Oxnard councilmen, a former councilwoman and an assemblyman. The promoters bundled the small contributions to get around state disclosure laws.

Lopez, a 17-year council veteran, said a firm proposal to limit campaign contributions has not yet been developed. But he said Ventura’s new law could be a catalyst.

“I think it is something that, if most communities put it before the voters, the result would be the same,” he said. “There is a desire on the part of the public to reduce what they feel is undue pressure on public officials by the special interests.”