South Bay Officials Beat the Clock With Early Fund-Raisers

A flurry of fund-raising activity has taken place among South Bay officials in recent weeks as they raced to beat the clock on new campaign contribution limits.

Proposition 73, which took effect Jan. 1 this year, limits the amounts politicians and would-be politicians can receive from individuals and political action committees.

But the limits are based on the fiscal year, not the calendar year.

So, to get maximum contributions for their next campaigns, some officeholders held political dinners or receptions before the fiscal year ended Friday.

That allows them to tap the same sources of funds again in the new fiscal year, in effect doubling the contributions permitted during the first calendar year the limits are in place.

On Thursday night, Carson City Councilman John Anderson held his first political fund-raiser since being appointed in May to fill a council vacancy.

On Wednesday night, George Nakano, the top vote-getter in last year’s Torrance City Council race, held a fund-raiser even though his reelection campaign is almost three years away.

The previous week, Torrance City Councilman Bill Applegate, who will be up for reelection next March, also had a fund-raiser.

5 Fund-Raisers, 1 Letter

In fact, so far this non-election year, five of the seven Torrance council members have held fund-raising events and one sent a letter to supporters that also requested funds.

Meanwhile, in Sacramento, freshman Assemblyman Curtis R. Tucker Jr. (D-Inglewood) had an early June fund-raising event that netted an estimated $15,000.

The events were all scheduled with the fiscal year deadline in mind.

Torrance City Councilman Mark Wirth held a $100-per-person event in early June at a local restaurant. “We threw it together to beat the deadline,” Wirth said.

Normally, he holds fund-raisers in the summer or early fall and in January or February, but not this year. “I have to beat the July 1 deadline,” he said.

Wirth said the contribution limits may encourage candidates to have a fund-raiser every year to build up a campaign treasury.

Councilman Nakano said Proposition 73 was the reason for his decision to hold a $100-per-person event just two days before the deadline. “I didn’t have a fund-raiser last year,” Nakano explained. “I was going to have one (fund-raiser) this calendar year anyway, so I might as well have it prior to June 30.”

Councilman Tim Mock said he had a $200-per-person event in March, the first fund-raiser he has held during that time of year. Usually, he holds a campaign event in the fall, but he postponed last year’s because “I wasn’t quite sure what would happen with the funds if I raised them before January.”

Mayor Katy Geissert, who last month sent out a letter announcing her intention to seek reelection, said in an interview that holding a fund-raiser before June 30 allows a candidate or officeholder to go back to the same sources after July 1. Geissert said her letter seeking support didn’t specify a deadline for contributions, but she said she received several checks before the end of June.

Proposition 73, approved by the voters last year, imposes limits on contributions in state and local races.

Individuals can give no more than $1,000, small political action committees can donate up to $2,500, and larger, established political committees can give a maximum of $5,000 to a candidate each fiscal year.

May Increase Frequency

Geissert, who intends to run for reelection as mayor next March, said Proposition 73 may increase the frequency of fund-raisers at the local level.

She said it is unclear whether politicians can use surplus funds from previous years. “So you have to assume that you are starting from zero.”

Torrance Councilman Dan Walker rescheduled his traditional $500-a-person fund-raiser from December, 1988, to the end of March to avoid uncertainty about how the money could be used.

Walker said all his previous fund-raisers had been held in December. “My fund-raiser has been as consistent as the sunrise,” he said.

“I have made it very, very clear that the reason it was moved from December to the early part of the following year was to avoid the ambiguity and uncertainty of the two propositions passed by the voters,” Walker said.

Ten court cases have been filed challenging various provisions of Proposition 73, one of two campaign reform measures on the ballot in June, 1988.

The other measure, Proposition 68, would have established public financing of legislative campaigns, but it received fewer votes than Proposition 73, and as a result did not take effect.

Had Deadline in Mind

A preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton allows candidates to use money raised before Jan. 1 for future campaigns as long as the contributions are within the new limits.

Assemblyman Tucker said he had Proposition 73’s fiscal year deadline in mind when he scheduled the Sacramento fund-raiser for early June.

Tucker said the measure has not deterred fund raising, although some contributors have been wary about “what you can do or can’t do” under the new law.

Nevertheless, Tucker said he has managed to raise “a substantial amount. It really hasn’t hampered anything.”

Assemblyman Richard E. Floyd (D-Carson) said he has heard some of his colleagues say that they planned fund-raisers before June 30 so major contributors do not “max out” by reaching the limit.

Floyd said he did not reschedule his fund-raisers because of Proposition 73. But he acknowledged that having an event before the fiscal year ends and then holding another in the next fiscal year “gives you a double shot” at contributions from the same sources.

Aides to Assemblyman Gerald N. Felando (R-San Pedro) and Sens. Robert G. Beverly (R-Manhattan Beach) and Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles) said there was no change in fund-raising schedules because of Proposition 73.

Assemblyman Dave Elder (D-San Pedro) and Sen. Ralph C. Dills (D-Gardena) did not respond to a telephone inquiry.

‘Nothing but Negative’

Walter Zelman, executive director of California Common Cause, a public interest group that sponsored rival Proposition 68, was sharply critical of the fiscal year provision of Proposition 73.

“There is absolutely no reason to put in a contribution limit based on a fiscal year,” Zelman said. “It’s nothing but negative.”

The Common Cause measure would have banned all off-year fund-raising.

Zelman said the fiscal year deadline “encourages, if not forces, legislators to engage in the worst form of fund raising”--during non-election years when their focus should be on legislation.

One of the authors of Proposition 73, Sen. Quentin Kopp (I-San Francisco), said he recently received nine or 10 unsolicited contributions from political action committees and corporations “attributable to the end of the fiscal year and a feeling of reassurance that such contributions were valid.”

Kopp defended the fiscal year provision, saying the concept was intended to allow a fund-raising period for primary and general elections.