As the dust continues to settle after Election Day, local city councils are grappling with how much individual donors should be allowed to influence future elections.
With the passing of Assembly Bill 571, an update to the state’s election code, cities that don’t already have local campaign contribution limits must decide before the end of the year whether they want to set their own cap or default to the state’s.
Prior to the bill’s passing, most jurisdictions in California—including Santa Maria—had not imposed limits on how much money candidates for local office can take from their donors, Santa Maria Chief Deputy City Clerk Rhonda White said during a Nov. 17 presentation to the council.
But once AB 571 goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2021, cities that don’t establish their own limits will be automatically defaulted to the state limit of $4,700, which is expected to be adjusted to $4,900 in the new year. The Fair Political Practices Commission will enforce the limit in cities that go with this option. On the Central Coast, Grover Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Carpinteria already decided to default to the state’s limit, White said.
If a city opts to establish its own limit—whether it’s less than, equal to, or more than the state’s cap—it must also take on the regulatory responsibilities of enforcing that limit. Or, a city council can vote to establish no limit, in which case no regulation would be necessary.
Santa Maria city staff recommended that the council maintain the city’s status quo by establishing no contribution limits for local office candidates.
Councilmember Etta Waterfield made a motion for city staff to move forward with writing a no-limit resolution, and the vote was split 3-2 over the issue, with Councilmembers Gloria Soto and Michael Moats dissenting.
While Mayor Alice Patino sided with Waterfield and Councilmember Mike Cordero in the vote, she expressed some initial hesitation.
“I can remember … when an amount of $5,000 was given to someone running for City Council, and I remember thinking that was, really, quite an exorbitant amount,” Patino said.
But, she continued, the fact that the city would have to take on enforcement if it established its own limit is “where I find trouble.” In a no-limit situation, which Patino ultimately supported, there wouldn’t be a limit for the city to regulate, and the state would stay out of it.
Soto also recognized the benefit of not burdening the city with regulatory responsibilities. But rather than achieving this with a no-limit resolution, Soto suggested that the city default to the state’s cap and let the Fair Political Practices Commission do the enforcing.
“If the concern is really around staff capacity, going with the state limit isn’t a bad idea,” Soto said. “The average campaign contributions for city councils between 2016 and 2020 have been about $1,500 … . That is way below the state [limit].”
This way, Soto continued, “our staff won’t be burdened with that task and candidates that run will still be able to run a competitive campaign.”
Cordero maintained his support for establishing no cap, arguing that it hasn’t been a problem historically. In the most recent election, Patino received the largest single contribution given to a candidate: $3,000, nearly $2,000 under the state limit.
Moats argued that though it hasn’t been a problem historically, “there’s certainly the potential for it to occur in the future.”
“I think [$4,900] is really a good upper limit, and I support just following what the state has to say,” Moats said.
“Campaigns are incredibly expensive, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that one donor should have the influence of changing the outcome of a campaign,” Soto added. “Having campaign limits will ensure that each campaign is run at the grassroots level.”
The vote at the Nov. 17 meeting gave staff the go-ahead to write a resolution to establish no campaign contribution limits, which the City Council planned to vote on at its Dec. 1 meeting, after the Sun went to press.
In Lompoc, City Council members have not yet heard any staff presentations or recommendations on the issue. Lompoc Mayor Jenelle Osborne told the Sun that the city attorney was in the process of reviewing the state’s legislation and will provide guidance to Lompoc City Council before the end of the year.
At the Nov. 17 Santa Maria City Council meeting, Chief Deputy City Clerk White said that Buellton and Guadalupe are similarly working with their attorneys to present information to their city councils before the year ends.
Guadalupe Mayor Ariston Julian told the Sun that he personally did not see a need for Guadalupe to establish its own campaign contribution limit.
“In the past, when there were several people running for office, I don’t believe more than $300 was spent on campaigns,” Julian said.
For this reason, Julian said he would be open to either establishing no limit or defaulting to the state’s limit. He said the item will be agendized for the city’s Dec. 8 meeting.
Staff Writer Malea Martin can be reached at mmartin@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Dec 3-10, 2020.