Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Palo Alto City Council hopefuls can strike signing a campaign-financing pledge from their to-do lists for the Nov. 6 election.
With a 6-2 vote Monday evening the council doused Councilwoman LaDoris Cordell’s effort to voluntarily limit campaign spending.
“It’s just a can of worms,” Councilwoman Judy Kleinberg summed up her feelings, adding to numerous reasons cited by colleagues to reject the proposed program.
The program would have encouraged candidates to sign a form agreeing to limit contributions to $300 and spend no more than $30,000. The limits would also have applied to non-monetary contributions, such as the donation of services. But the plan had no enforcement mechanism.
In exchange, the city would have waived the fee charged for the ballot statement, which is less than $2,000. The city currently covers the fee for all candidates.
But with only the support of Councilman Peter Drekmeier — Mayor Yoriko Kishimoto was absent — Cordell’s effort isn’t likely to return anytime soon.
Councilman Jack Morton’s oft-repeated insistence that Palo Alto doesn’t have trouble with campaign financing was echoed by Councilman John Barton and Vice Mayor Larry Klein Monday night.
“I’m leery of solutions to problems that don’t exist,” Klein said. “I think all it’s going to do is create confusion.”
Morton said he didn’t want the city to begin charging some candidates the campaign fee but waiving it for others.
Councilman Bern Beecham said the non-monetary contribution limits weren’t adequate because many candidates receive donated design and Web site services worth significantly more.
Kleinberg said she opposed the program because it couldn’t be enforced, comparing it to a can of worms.
But Councilwoman Dena Mossar gave the idea comparably high praise: “If this were to pass I don’t think it’s the end of the world.”
Drekmeier took the defeat in stride.
“I’m going to feel good following this meeting,” he said. “I’m walking away feeling like I tried.” (Staff Writer Becky Trout can be e-mailed at btrout@paweekly.com.)
Not surprised that the council doesn’t like the idea of spending limits on campaigns. Since the big guys have ott budgets they can’t see why the aspiring big guys can’t too.
I for one think much too much money is spent on all types of American elections.
Any candidate can still limit their own expenditures and make an issue of it, if they like. Tend to agree this is a solution looking for a problem. Hey, City Council – got a few minutes to talk about street repairs????
Solutions looking for a problem is Cordell’s hallmark of her tenure on the city council.
Glad to see that the vast majority of the council had the common sense to vote this down.
Now what issue can they move on to now, while avoiding infrastructure and other pressing matters?