City officials are mulling a major overhaul of Gilroy’s election
process, including a revamped, soon-to-be-hyped campaign ethics
policy encouraged by Mayor Al Pinheiro and 2012 mayoral candidate
Dion Bracco that would prohibit anonymous donations and allow
residents to sue candidates who may violate the new rules. Full
story
The new all-American family
Rift over retail plans for Visitors Bureau continues
Red Phone: Water district reps send wrong message
GUSD scrambles to meet vaccination deadline
Today’s breaking news:
City officials are mulling a major overhaul of Gilroy’s election process, including a revamped, soon-to-be-hyped campaign ethics policy encouraged by Mayor Al Pinheiro and 2012 mayoral candidate Dion Bracco that would prohibit anonymous donations and allow residents to sue candidates who may violate the new rules.
The Gilroy Election Ethics Program – promoted by the city’s Open Government Commission and inspired by a similar City of Santa Clara ethics plan – also lays out a meticulous, seven-month marketing campaign filled with citywide mailings promoting the new ethics policies and video messages from candidates promising to run clean campaigns.
The program would end the city’s current practice of allowing anonymous donations for contributions less than $100 and introduce a “last word” candidate forum hosted by the League of Women Voters the night before Nov. 6, 2012, Election Day.
Candidate spending limits also would climb 40 percent from approximately $25,000 to roughly $35,000, and fundraising would be cut off 11 days before residents head to the polls – counter to a current policy that allows donations up to and after Election Day.
The new guidelines, which must be approved by the City Council, were crafted over the last several months by Pinheiro, Bracco and Councilman Peter Leroe-Munoz – the three-man team who make up the Open Government Commission.
When asked how he could avoid a conflict of interest running for mayor while also helping draft a new election ethics policy, Bracco said the recently released guidelines had already been in discussion for years, and the Open Government Commission was “just trying to get the ball rolling.”
During a May 12 commission meeting, Pinheiro suggested the commission act as the review body for all campaign ethics complaints, according to meeting minutes filed by the City of Gilroy.
Bracco and Leroe-Munoz disagreed, however, stating that Council members should not sit on any ethics review body to avoid a conflict of interest, according to the minutes. In a July 14 commission meeting, City Attorney Callon agreed that Council members could not handle complaints related to elections because of potential conflicts of interest, according to the minutes.
Pinheiro argued, despite three Council members and one mayoral candidate on the commission, there was no conflict of interest.
“At the end of the day, it’s something that’s brought to the Council in full view of the community,” Pinheiro said.
He also laughed, “I guess if anyone on the Council runs for re-election after passing this ordinance, that’s a conflict of interest too.”
Despite cautious support from several Council members, officials don’t see eye-to-eye on what the project’s final draft should look like.
Councilman Perry Woodward, the only other candidate to announce a 2012 mayoral bid, said he’ll likely vote for the new ordinance once it’s finalized, but called a raise in candidate spending limits and allowing residents to file civil suits against candidates – “ill advised.”
“Anybody could sue if they believe the ordinance had been violated,” Woodward said. “I’d just like to see that eliminated.”
If found guilty of violating the city’s ethics policies, candidates could be fined up to $1,000 or three times the amount of an illegal donation or expenditure, according to City Attorney Linda Callon. The fines would be paid to the city, she said.
City Clerk Shawna Freels said cost estimates would be available by the commission’s Sept. 29 meeting. The commission meets quarterly, according to the city’s website.
The city would send election ethics policy notices to residents inside their monthly utility bills in June and September next year, along with separate, direct mailings to Gilroy homes in the fall, according to the program’s 2012 schedule, which Bracco estimated costs between $4,000-$6,000 each.
Candidates would also star in brief, online video spots – called “I pledge” messages – and participate in a workshop informing candidates how to run ethical campaigns.
Council members disagreed whether Gilroy even had enough of a history of crooked campaigning to require new election guidelines.
“We’ve never really had that much controversy to make you think it’s necessary,” Councilman Bob Dillon said. “It ain’t broke the way I see it, so I don’t want to fix it.”
But Pinheiro said the new rules could deter candidates from publicizing misleading information about their competitors and the final candidate forum would provide one last chance to dispute any late-breaking accusations.
Monday night was the city’s “first stab” at the process, Bracco said. There will likely be more changes to the proposed policies by the time the program kicks off next May, he said.
As for candidate spending limits, Bracco stopped short of saying what changes, if any, were possible.
“We’re going to discuss that. We’ll either leave it the way it is, or go in the middle or something,” Bracco said. “Hopefully we’ll be able to get everybody on board.”
That could be tough to do for now.
Dillon said he was comfortable with the city’s current process, and Councilwoman Cat Tucker questioned whether the ordinance’s proposed financial measures had anything to do with ethics.
