Gilroy City Councilman Perry Woodward says the city’s Open Government Commission – a panel he created and was later voted out of – wants to raise the local campaign expenditure ceiling $5,000 to assist his 2012 mayoral opponent, commission member and fellow Councilman Dion Bracco.
“This is the classic case of somebody not having things go their way, so they keep bringing it back up,” Woodward said. “And I think Dion Bracco thinks he’s going to have to spend more money than allowed now.”
Meanwhile, Bracco, who announced his mayoral bid in January, told the Dispatch Thursday he may not run after all, citing two upcoming knee surgeries, a daughter soon headed to college and the desire to spend more time improving his business, Bracco’s Towing & Transport.
“There’s a lot of things going in my life that need my attention,” Bracco said, adding he’s been having second thoughts about running for the last two months.
Bracco said he wouldn’t comment on Woodward’s theory. In regard to the campaign ceiling, Bracco only said, “We just thought it was time to maybe raise it up a little bit,” and that inflation had played a role.
The stir comes as Commission members – Bracco, Mayor Al Pinheiro and Councilman Peter Leroe-Muñoz – prepare to discuss the trio’s latest proposed revisions to a city elections ordinance during Monday night’s Council meeting. The new plan, members say, is intended to add transparency to elections and to create a widely publicized ethics program beginning in May.
Councilwoman Cat Tucker and a former, three-term Councilman who plans to run again have raised questions about the ordinance’s ultimate goal. And Woodward says the Commission – the only city commission manned only by sitting Council members – has no business tackling elections issues.
“This doesn’t have anything to do with open government. I’m offended by this misuse of the Open Government Commission,” Woodward says. “They’re turning this into an attempt to change the rules of an election. And that’s inappropriate.”
In January, the Council voted a befuddled Woodward and often-absent Councilman Peter Arellano off the Commission, installing Bracco, Pinheiro and Leroe-Muñoz. It was Woodward, Bracco and Pinheiro who were outvoted 4-3 to decide that arrangement.
On Thursday, Tucker said she could see election matters going before the Commission, but only if an official complaint had been filed. She hasn’t heard of a single one, she says.
The Commission, formed in 2008 after approving a city Open Government Ordinance, seeks to increase transparency of city matters.
“In general, I don’t know what we’re trying to fix,” Tucker said of the ordinance. “And I don’t like making any legislation based on fear. Are we fearful that one bad apple is going to ruin it?”
She says there’s already measures in place to keep candidates in line. The new ordinance as presented “just seems crazy,” she says.
“Maybe somebody’s planning a dirty campaign, and someone found out and they’re trying to prevent it,” Tucker joked.
Pinheiro, however, says the Commission decided to tackle elections issues because they fell under the umbrella of “transparency.”
“And where better to talk about transparency an ethics than during election time?” he argues.
The current $25,000 campaign ceiling – or roughly 50 cents per resident – nearly passed through the Commission’s Nov. 22 meeting untouched. But as Commission members readied to approve the new draft, Pinheiro and Bracco suggested raising the ceiling – as high as $35,000, or 70 cents per resident – a figure included in a previous draft returned by the Council.
“I can go either way on it,” Bracco first said, heard by an audience of just one community member.
After Pinheiro replied, “I support the increase,” Bracco immediately chimed that, “It’s been a long time,” since the city enacted its $25,000 voluntary limit back in 2003.
“I don’t have an issue going up 20 cents to the 70 cents that we had before,” Pinheiro said.
After Leroe-Muñoz jumped in, saying he didn’t think the Commission should raise the ceiling at all, Bracco offered a compromise, saying the Commission could raise it just 10 cents per resident, amounting to roughly $30,000 per candidate.
Leroe-Muñoz answered, “I could live with that.”
One former city official who’s taking another run at the dais next year isn’t going quietly, especially regarding the plan to eliminate all anonymous donations.
“Why is this necessary?” said Paul Kloecker, who served as a Councilman from 1983 to 1995 and lost an election bid for Council in 2010. “This is sort of an invasion of their privacy.”
The unnamed donations are currently legal if they’re less than $100, but they would be disallowed altogether under the proposed ordinance. This is a problem, Kloecker says, because many residents and business owners who donate small amounts don’t want their names publicly tied to candidates. He also says some grassroots campaigns are dependent on those small contributions.
But during the Nov. 22 commission meeting – held two nights before Thanksgiving and attended by just Kloecker – the Commission held fast to its plan to end anonymous donations as it shuffled its way through the latest round of revisions, which now include:
n Eliminating a previously drafted cutoff of all donations 11 days prior to an election; the restriction was removed to allow candidates a period to pay off campaign debts;
n Voiding the expenditure limit agreement for all candidates if even one opponent uses personal funds to exceed the agreed-upon ceiling;
n Candidates would have to report to the City Clerk and to his or her opponents the day their campaign ceiling is breached.
Commission members, who voted unanimously to approve the new draft, also had no problem with spending up to $10,000 from the city’s general fund to advertise the new ethics program by sending out mailers to more than 17,000 registered voters in Gilroy.
The mailers are part of a lengthy, involved promotional schedule, which will include a monthly newsletters, a Facebook page, candidate workshops, public service announcements from candidates pledging to run ethical campaigns and a “last word” forum the night before Election Day. The city has not calculated a final price tag for the total program.
The Commission makes recommendations to the Council, which then chooses whether to approve or deny proposals. The Commission hopes to have final approval for its new plans by February, City Clerk Shawna Freels said.
In the midst of crafting its ethics plan, the Commission also expects to alter its membership to five total seats – three Council members and two residents.
“I think the goal of this Commission should be to include public members. I think, long term, is this something we turn over to a solely public body or is this something that still retains some membership within the City Council?” Leroe-Muñoz said during the Nov. 22 meeting. “I think the first step in this process is to include members of the public. So I’m very much in favor of beginning that process.”
Bracco agrees, but says the city should be extra wary of who it picks.
“It’s tough, because you could end up with a bunch of people who just have an ax to grind with the city,” he said during the Nov. 22 meeting.
He later added the Commission wouldn’t want “anyone bad” to join just because they were the only ones who applied.
Leroe-Muñoz argued, however, “I think it’s a risk worth taking.”
– Raising voluntary campaign expenditure ceiling fromapproximately $25,000 per candidate to $30,000 per candidate
– Voiding the expenditure limit agreement for all candidates ifeven one opponent uses personal funds to exceed the agreed-uponceiling
– Candidates would have to report to the City Clerk and to his orher opponents the day their campaign ceiling is breached
– Eliminating a previously drafted cutoff of all donations 11 daysprior to an election, mainly to allow candidates to pay off theircampaign debts
May: Launch of ‘ethics’ website
June: Bring in college intern to helpfacilitate
July: Public outreach in newsletters, Facebook,Twitter, farmers market and Gilroy Garlic Festival
July: Film videos pledging to run ethicalcampaigns
August: Host “how to conduct an ethical campaign”workshop
September: Media release on program progress
October: Two direct mailings to registered voters
Nov. 5: “The last word” candidate forum, moderatedby League of Women voters
Nov. 6: Election Day
