A former council candidate says newspapers should “filter” political attack ads. Also, two council members say the $100 limit on individual campaign contributions should be raised.
By Kevin Connelly/ Special to The Malibu Times
The third and final ad-hoc committee meeting regarding City Council election laws, discussing election-related topics from ethics to campaign contribution limits to the amounts that newspapers charge for political advertisements, took place last week.
Much of the evening’s debate, moderated by Mayor Pro Tem Ken Kearsley and Councilmember Jeff Jennings, focused on campaign ethics.
In 2004, the city hired ethics consultant Xandra Kayden to oversee the campaign. Kayden, with the help of a commission, accepted complaints about ethical violations in campaign literature and newspaper ads. She then wrote opinions about whether the candidates had committed an ethical violation, but the candidates were not punished regardless of her decision.
Many of the speakers at the meeting, including 2004 City Council candidate John Mazza, questioned the objectivity of Kayden. “The problem was the leadership [of that ethics committee] and Kayden’s biased opinions,” Mazza said.
Most at the meeting agreed that Kayden’s ethics committee in 2004 was imperfect, but opinions became divergent when discussions focused improving the ethics of the 2006 election.
“I would question the impartiality of any committee,” Planning Commission Chair Les Moss said. “I don’t know where to find an acceptable group. I’m inclined to agree with those who are opposed to a committee. Nobody will be satisfied.”
Activist David Kagon suggested unethical election behavior should be redressed through the courts, but Mazza called this mode of action a “futile thing,” calling into question the practicality of lawsuits and the cost of legal fees.
“The way to attack outrageous ads is for newspapers not to print them,” Mazza said. “It is up to the newspaper…their journalistic ethics…to filter out some of this.”
Mazza mentioned an advertisement printed in The Malibu Times by property rights activist Anne Hoffman less than a week before Election Day in 2004 that featured Malibu activist Ozzie Silna, a Mazza supporter, holding moneybags. Mazza said he “lost votes in the election because people believed it.”
In response to Mazza, Jennings said, “We do not want to encourage newspapers to screen ads to freeze out a candidate they didn’t like. Newspapers are political too.”
Arnold G. York, publisher of The Malibu Times, after hearing about Mazza’s comment, said, “I am delighted that John Mazza wants me to be the official censor, but I’m afraid I must decline that role.”
Also, seeming to reject a suggestion in July by City Attorney Christi Hogin to employ the Santa Monica League of Women Voters as an ethics committee for the city, Jennings said the League is a “politicized body.” The League’s Web site calls the group a “nonpartisan political organization encouraging the informed and active participation of citizens in government.”
Kearsley and Jennings both had ideas for combating the ethical problems of city elections. Kearsley suggested the city hire someone to educate the public before the campaign, teaching them critical thinking skills in regard to elections and thus limiting the damaging potential of attack ads. Jennings suggested that City Council candidates mutually fund a monitor to respond to last-second attack ads as a means of “[curing] the problem before the election.”
Another item discussed at the meeting was whether to raise the $100 limit on individual contributions to the candidate’s campaign. Many have called this limit unfair because a committee not directly associated with a candidate’s campaign can spend an unlimited amount of money in support for that candidate. At the meeting, Kearsley said he was in favor of a $200 limit, while Jennings said he supported a limit of at least $500, adding, “The real problem in the last campaign was independent expenditures.”
Additionally, Jennings brought up the idea of reporting the name and dollar amount of each campaign contribution on a week-by-week basis on the city’s Web site, adding that “it’s not the money that is contributed, but the person who contributes it that is important.” Hogin called this idea “a treasurer’s nightmare.”
The last major topic of discussion at the meeting was the amount newspapers-particularly The Malibu Times-charge for political advertisements. Mazza said, “It costs more money for a political ad than an ad for Tootsie Rolls.” He said the Malibu Surfside News did not engage in this practice, which he referred to as “scalping.”
Former Planning Commissioner Richard Carrigan disagreed with Mazza, saying, “I paid a 20 percent premium [for my election advertisements]. [The newspapers] are entitled, if they have a huge demand for their product, to mark [the prices of political advertisements] up.”
The Malibu Times publisher York said this week that the newspaper charges whatever the rate card calls for.
Kearsley said he wasn’t sure if raising prices for political ads was a problem, but he would bring up the issue to the City Council. Hogin said that the recommendations from the ad-hoc meeting would be brought before the City Council during the first meeting in October.