The LookOut news

Fundraising Battle for Living Wage Rematch off to Slow Start; VERITAS Campaign in Debt

By Elizabeth Schneider and Jorge Casuso

October 9 -- Opponents of the living wage law on the November ballot have raised $308,750, far more than the $38,099 raised by proponents of the measure, but far short of the $880,000 raised by this time two years ago for a business-backed initiative on the 2000 ballot.

Like the money raised by the measure's opponents, the contributions to the pro-living wage campaign are meager compared to the money collected in 2000, according to statements filed Monday with the City Clerk. By the Sept. 30 filing date two years ago, proponents of the Living Wage had raised $178,003, more than four times the amount raised this year.

Other campaigns reporting contributions were the following:

  • The campaign for VERITAS (Yes on HH) -- which among other things would carve out council districts, elect a mayor at large with veto powers and set term limits -- raised $23,146, bringing the total raised as of Sept. 30 to $54,250. The campaign, however, has spent $73,211, having accrued $36,790 in unpaid bills, according to the financial statement filed Monday. VERITAS had a cash balance of $14,454, but was $41,791 in debt.

  • The Committee for Excellence in Education (EE) -- which backs a $300-a-year parcel tax for 12 years to help fund public schools -- has raised $63,611, all of it in the latest period, which began July 1. The campaign has spent $36,137.

  • The campaign for SMRPH (II) -- which would establish procedures for converting apartment buildings to condominiums -- reported $13,644 in contributions during the latest filing period, bringing the total contributions to $15,267. The campaign has spent $10,048 to date.

Of the total money raised by September 30 for the looming Living Wage battle, the lion's share came during the latest filing period. Opponents of the measure -- Fighting Against Irresponsible Regulations (FAIR) -- raised $258,955 during the past thre months, compared to $24,099 raised by the Coalition to Protect the Living Wage.

Opponents of the unprecedented measure -- the nation's first municipal wage law covering businesses with no direct financial ties to the City -- expect contributions to remain steady until the November 5 election.

"Unfortunately this isn't representative of the breadth of the contributions we will be receiving," said FAIR campaign press secretary Seth Jacobson. Money in support of the campaign is coming both from small and large businesses, but "not everybody can afford to contribute the same," he said.

Tom Larmore, a spokesman for the Chamber of Commerce, said he was not surprised that less money has been raised for the current campaign.

"It was a very different economy two years ago," Larmore said.

Restaurants and hotels were the biggest contributors, giving close to $160,000 for the latest period, which ran from July 1 to September 30. The largest chunk came from Hotel Casa Del Mar, which contributed $75,000.

Four hotels -- the Radisson Huntley, The Doubletree Guest Suites, Loews Santa Monica Beach Hotel and the Hotel Oceana -- combined for a total of $160,000. Among the restaurants, PF Changs contributed $10,000, while The Lobster gave $3,500.

"Some (contributions) are disproportionately large," Jacobson said. "But that doesn't mean they are the most impacted party."

Advocates of the Living Wage law -- which requires businesses in the Coastal Zone that gross more than $5 million a year to pay workers $10.50 an hour if benefits are included -- were quick to renew their attacks on the hotel spending.

"It's clear that the Santa Monica hotels are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to deny workers a fair wage," said Danny Feingold, a spokesman for the pro-living wage campaign. "We believe that voters will see through this big money effort to stop hard working housekeepers, janitors and bus boys from making enough to support their families.

"If you look at the economic facts," said Feingold, a staff member for the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy (LAANE), "the majority of hotel workers who would be affected by JJ are not making a living wage and are not receiving health benefits. That's what our campaign is all about."

The bulk of the money spent to date by opponents of the measure -- $257,851 -- is going toward what Jacobson calls an "aggressive grassroots door-to-door walking campaign."

"We're going to talk to every registered voter in Santa Monica at least once," he said.

According to Jacobson, FAIR currently has four or five groups of individuals circulating in every voting district in the city.

"These people who are going out are employees of restaurants, hotels and small businesses and are talking about the impacts of JJ on their jobs," said Jacobson. "We're expecting to get a lot more contributions from a variety of organizations."

While the majority of FAIR money is coming from Santa Monica businesses located in the Coastal Zone, Jacobson said, "few people from Santa Monica have contributed" to the Yes on JJ campaign.

According to the financial statements, LAANE has contributed $24,549 ($12,549 during the latest filing period), accounting for most of money in the group's coffers. The state Hotel Employee and Restaurant Employee Union has contributed $6,000 and another $1,500 in in-kind office space.

"There is a lot of outside money coming into Santa Monica, whereas we have a lot of organizations and businesses who are impacted and who care about the campaign," Jacobson said. "There is quite a stark difference between the campaigns."

Prop JJ -- which is expected to cost the City $3 million to implement -- will eat into an already bare-bones municipal budget, Jacobson said. "Is this really what we want to do, to trade school books for what might be a law that may or may not benefit a very narrow group of workers?"

Feingold disagrees with the reasoning.

"The city has invested tens of millions of dollars to make the tourism industry successful," Feingold said. "Those profits are being sent to CEO's of corporations not even based in Santa Monica. We believe that the money should stay in the community."

As for the argument that the law will cost Santa Monica taxpayers, "Right now tax payers are on the hook for millions and millions of dollars every year in anti-poverty programs because workers are not paid enough to support themselves," Feingold said. "Measure JJ would eliminate the need for those subsidies of large corporations."

Copyright ©1999, 2000, 2001 surfsantamonica.com. All Rights Reserved.