D.A. Seeks Records of Donations to 7 Officials

Citing concerns about possible campaign irregularities, county prosecutors have requested the financial records of all seven Ventura City Council members as part of a review by the district attorney’s political corruption unit.

The Oct. 4 request by Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury’s office immediately followed a series of contentious meetings where Ventura council members and public speakers debated a controversial $18.7-million stadium project--and where some speakers accused ballpark backers of exercising undue influence through campaign gifts to council members.

“It seemed timely in light of the public discussions and concerns related to the stadium issue,” Bradbury said. “We do this periodically as part of our proactive effort to keep the county clean and honest public officials honest.”

The prosecutors’ letters request council records of all campaign contributions and expenses regardless of size for three years, beginning in 1994, said Chief Deputy Dist. Atty. Jeff Bennett. The review will focus on lists of donations under $100, which do not have to be publicly declared but must be maintained for audits by local and state watchdog agencies.

The district attorney’s political corruption unit was formed in 1993 in the wake of a card-club controversy in Oxnard, where a developer was later convicted of criminal money-laundering for reimbursing his employees for contributions they made to public officials.

After reviewing campaign contributions to all Moorpark council members, the same unit gained a criminal conflict-of-interest conviction last year against Moorpark Councilman Scott Montgomery for his relations with a trash hauler.

Four Ventura council members reached Monday--Ray Di Guilio, Jim Friedman, Jim Monahan and Steve Bennett--said they either welcomed the district attorney’s review or at least would cooperate with it.

Council members Gary Tuttle and Rosa Lee Measures, both of whom are on vacation, could not be reached for comment. Nor could Mayor Jack Tingstrom, who was attending a League of California Cities conference.

None of the council members contacted had submitted records so far, but they said they plan to respond soon. They said they will turn over both their publicly declared contributions of $100 or more, which are already on file with the city clerk, and the confidential donations of $99 or less.

“I have nothing to hide,” Di Guilio said. “I hope we can get on the other side of this and maybe put some credibility back into the local political process.”

Di Guilio, Friedman and Tingstrom all received strong backing from stadium interests in last November’s council election. The other four Ventura council members last ran for city office in 1993, before developer John Hofer announced his ballpark proposal.

Friedman also said the district attorney’s review might be helpful because it will clear the air.

“We were very, very cautious in everything we did, and kept as accurate a record as we could,” he said. “My records are really an open book.”

Indeed, both Di Guilio and Friedman last week showed The Times records of their contributions of $99 or less that were previously confidential. The records showed sizable contributions from stadium interests and dealers at the Ventura Auto Mall, which the Hofer family owns. The auto mall is adjacent to the ballpark site south of the Ventura Freeway near Johnson Drive.

But the records also showed that both councilmen had broad-based community support, with the large majority of their contributions coming from other sources.

Friedman noted that he has recently opposed construction of the stadium because, as proposed, it would cost the city $18.7 million. Di Guilio said he thinks the project will still make sense after negotiations bring down the city’s share of the project.

Tingstrom, probably the council’s strongest stadium supporter, declined to identify his confidential donors last week, saying that some told him they did not want their privacy violated.

Monahan said he has asked his campaign treasurer to comply with the district attorney’s request.

Although last elected to the council in 1993, Monahan raised about $60,000 in an unsuccessful bid for the County Board of Supervisors last year, and his contributions for that race will be analyzed by investigators. Monahan also offered to let The Times review his confidential donations of $99 or less.

“I don’t see the money, I just turn it over to my treasurer,” Monahan said. “I don’t handle contributions.”

Although Monahan voted last month to continue negotiations with Hofer, he maintained Monday that he has always been skeptical about the ballpark proposal.

“The one person who was half convincing me we should go forward was Jim Friedman,” he said.

Councilman Steve Bennett, who led a successful campaign finance reform initiative last year and recently raised the issue of possible improper contributions to his colleagues, said he wants the inquiry to proceed.

“I’m particularly concerned about contributions from Hofer’s employees,” Bennett said. “That is one of the biggest red flags in campaign giving to candidates.”

The councilman was referring to Friedman’s acknowledgment that he returned six $99 checks last year that his campaign received from Hofer employees.

Friedman said he had no reason to believe any of the Hofer employees would have been reimbursed for their contributions, a violation of state law. He said he returned the money just to be cautious.

Hofer could not be reached for comment Monday.

But Thomas Wilson, a manager at a self-storage business owned by the Hofer family, said Monday that he remembers sending a check to Friedman because he liked the candidate. He said he did not recall that the money was returned.

“We make our own choices,” Wilson said. “I like Friedman; he’s a good guy.”

Wilson also said he does not remember if he contributed to other candidates last year. “I’d have to go back and check it out, but I don’t think I need to do that.”

He refused to identify other Hofer employees who donated to candidates.

But Hofer-company bookkeeper Amanda Gilliland, identified by Friedman as a $99 donor, said last week that she did not recall the gift. She said she was sure her boss would not have asked her to make it. “He wouldn’t ask me to do something like that,” she said.

As things stand, Hofer’s proposal for a 5,000-seat California League ballpark is in jeopardy. All but one of the seven City Council members--Tingstrom--have said they will not approve it unless it is ratified by voters as a ballot measure.

Yet, the majority favors continued negotiations to determine the city’s best deal. City Manager Donna Landeros, the city’s point person in negotiations, is scheduled to bring Hofer’s new offer back to the council next Monday.