Supervisors Move Up Election Fund Drives

In an apparent effort to beat restrictions that would be imposed by campaign reform measures on the state and county ballot, three Los Angeles County supervisors are holding major fund-raising events to swell their already substantial campaign war chests.

Supervisors Yvonne Brathwaite Burke and Mike Antonovich, both of whom easily won reelection last spring and will not face voters again until 2000, are expected to raise several hundred thousand dollars each in the weeks before county voters decide the fate of Measure B in the Nov. 5 election.

Two other measures, Propositions 208 and 212, that would restrict fund-raising in state and local races are also on the statewide ballot.

The county campaign reform measure--placed on the local ballot by Burke and her colleagues Zev Yaroslavsky and Deane Dana--would impose the first limits ever on campaign contributions in county races and would ban fund-raising in certain nonelection periods.

The supervisors are raising money when they are not bound by any of the restrictions contained in the reform measure, which would limit how much money each contributor could give and impose a ban on raising funds from six months after their last election until 15 months before the next time they face voters. At present, there are no limits on how much individuals can give or when the supervisors can raise money for their campaigns.

Antonovich, the chairman of the Board of Supervisors, moved up his planned fund-raiser from next spring to next week because he said the ballot measures “will preclude a spring dinner.”

Habib Balian, an aide to the supervisor, said that Antonovich is taking every precaution “because of the possibility of reform.” Balian plans to take time off from his county job to organize the $500-a-person dinner at the Westin Bonaventure. Antonovich said he has already sold enough tickets to raise $300,000 before expenses. The supervisor had $284,604 left in his campaign treasury at the end of June.

Burke, who had no opponent in the March primary, held a $500-a-person birthday fund-raising dinner last Thursday at the Biltmore Hotel, although she already had $636,136 in her campaign treasury June 30.

“It would have not been wise to cancel it in view of the fact that I don’t know what the law is going to be after November,” Burke said. “I’m very concerned about the next election that I may have very serious competition. I think I was very fortunate this time.”

On her invitations, Burke indicated that the money raised might be used by a foundation to assist residents of the 2nd District, which she represents. Burke already has a foundation that provides swimming lessons to needy youngsters.

Supervisor Gloria Molina, who will not be up for reelection until 1998, will hold her annual fund-raiser Oct. 30.

Molina, who left the board room before the vote was taken to place Measure B on the ballot, said she favors the campaign reform effort. She had $198,732 in her campaign treasury June 30.

All three candidates are expected to tap the traditional sources of campaign cash in county races--special interests that do business with the county.

Yaroslavsky, who played a leading role in drafting the ballot measure, held a major fund-raiser at the Beverly Hilton last month. Yaroslavsky said he raised more than $400,000 at that dinner, which he intends to use to promote the campaign reform measure and a park bond measure on the November ballot, along with other causes. He already had $756,824 in his campaign fund at the end of last year.

Unlike his colleagues, Yaroslavsky said it was absolutely his intent that any money left in the supervisors’ campaign coffers could not be used for their future election campaigns. “You cannot use it for reelection,” he said.

Although the text of the measure allows candidates to transfer surplus campaign money to newly created officeholder or legal defense funds, it does not expressly prohibit use of the money for future campaigns.

Unlike major cities, including Los Angeles, and some counties, there are no limits on what amount can be given or spent in a race for supervisor, sheriff, district attorney or assessor.

The measure would impose a $200 limit on contributions unless a candidate for county office agreed to abide by a voluntary spending limit. If the candidate agreed to restrict spending, the contribution limit would rise to $1,000 per election.

If a candidate pumped $100,000 into his or her own campaign, the contribution limit for others would jump tenfold to $10,000. And in the case in which a rich candidate gave his or her campaign $300,000 or more, there would be no limits for other candidates.

The measure would also ban all fund-raising for countywide offices such as district attorney, sheriff and assessor. Fund-raising for those candidates can begin 18 months before the general election.