|
By Jorge Casuso
May 8 -- Worried that “money is having a destructive
effect on public policy,” a group of Santa Monica residents
and community groups have formed a coalition to lessen the
growing importance of private funding on local politics.
Called the Voter-Owned Transparent Elections for Santa Monica
(VOTE4SM), the group includes California Common Cause, the
Santa Monica Democratic Club, the California Clean Money Campaign,
Southern California Americans for Democratic Action and Santa
Monica’s five major neighborhood groups.
“We need to take money out of the equation,”
said Moira Brennan, a Santa Monica
parent who works with the California Clean Money Campaign.
“Our election system is too important to be left to
the highest bidder. We want the best, not the best-funded.”
According to a statement issued this week, among the questions
the coalition hopes to address are: “Why have City Council
election campaigns become so pricey? Has this impacted the
quality of life for the voter and resident in Santa Monica?
How can we make elections more transparent, and elected officials
more accountable?”
The new group was formed in the wake of one of the most expensive
campaigns in the city’s history. According to campaign
finance reports, Santa Monicans for Sensible Priorities raised
and spent some $400,000 on the November race for three open
council seats.
Nearly all of the money was in the form of independent expenditures
donated by the Edward Thomas Company, which owns two luxury
beachfront hotels.
On the other side of the political spectrum, Santa Monicans
for Renters’ Rights has raised more than $100,000 every
election year in individual $250 contributions.
Last year, the average funds spent by groups not associated
with a campaign also skyrocketed -- from $16,167 among six
candidates in 2002, to nearly $136,424 among five candidates
last year, according to a City Clerk report.
In addition, individual candidates have been raising and
spending more and more money on their council bids, with Council
member Bobby Shriver spending more than $350,000 in his successful
2004 election.
Worried by the trend, the City Council in March began seriously
tackling political reform for the first time in 15 years,
including possibly discussing whether to grant millions in
public financing for council candidates. (see
story)
The coalition is urging the council to adopt such a voluntary
system of full public financing.
“This kind of system promotes competition by enabling
more candidates -- and from more diverse backgrounds -- to
seek office, and reduces their dependence on special-interest
contributions,” said Marcy Koukhab, LA organizer for
California Common Cause and Santa Monica resident.
In Arizona and Maine such “Clean Elections” systems
have made a difference since they were instituted in 2000,
according to the coalition.
In Arizona, nine of the 11 statewide offices are held by
candidates running on public financing, while in Maine, 85
percent of the state legislature was “cleanly”
elected, coalition members said.
“No longer beholden to big donors, legislators in both
states have been able to successfully advance legislation
that promotes sustainability and fairness, such as discount
drug programs, universal health insurance, and strong environmental
protections,” according to a statement issued by the
coalition.
On Monday, May 14 the City will sponsor a workshop on the
electoral process at 7 p.m. at the Ken Edwards Center.
“The City Council wants to know what you think about
the electoral process in Santa Monica,” says a public
notice posted by the City Clerk. “Please attend a community
meeting and let us know what you think is and isn’t
working with the electoral process in our City.”
Those who cannot attend the meeting can visit the City’s
website at www.smgov.net
and complete a survey on how the electoral process is working
in Santa Monica, or call 310. 458.8211 to receive a survey
by mail.
| 
