Council to Ask for Exemption to Prop. 208

Frustrated by spending limits enacted by state voters in November, the Los Angeles City Council said Friday that it will ask city voters in April to let it raise and spend more annually through so-called “officeholder accounts.”

As part of a broad package of state campaign reforms, Proposition 208 set a $10,000 limit for the officeholder accounts, starting Jan. 1. Los Angeles previously had an annual limit of $75,000. (Many other portions of Proposition 208 do not apply locally because the city of Los Angeles already has tighter restrictions.)

The accounts allow politicians to raise funds between elections, and provide a slush fund that can be used for everything from extra staff to office parties to Little League sponsorships and flower arrangements for funerals--all without tapping the taxpayers.

The accounts are also the only way that City Council members can send newsletters to residents, because regular city accounts cannot be used for that purpose.

On Friday, council members focused on the importance of constituent communication, noting that one Los Angeles council district is larger than nearly all other California cities.

“It is not possible to communicate with almost a quarter of a million people on anything like a regular basis on $10,000 a year,” said Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg, noting that in her district of 60,000 households, even a mailing that costs only 20 cents per letter would exceed the new limits. “The public doesn’t expect to hear from its elected officials less.”

But many longtime City Hall observers scoffed at the focus on newsletters, saying council members more often spend money on dinners with lobbyists, gifts for staff and office improvements than they do on resident services.

Ethics Commission Executive Director Rebecca Avila said her staff is analyzing how all the officeholder money has been spent over the last two years. She also said she was concerned that the council was rushing the ballot measure, because she believes the current law already needs tightening.

“I’d like to know how much money they’re spending on that [constituent communication] right now,” Avila said. “If they were using the money for that, that’s a valid reason, it’s important for the voters to know what’s going on at City Hall. But there’s two questions: Are you actually doing [district mailing] and are you doing it any time other than right before you’re going on the ballot?”

The motion Friday sponsored by council members Nate Holden and Rudy Svorinich Jr. would return to the ballot all of the city’s pre-Proposition 208 campaign finance laws, asking voters to reenact them as part of the City Charter. Besides limiting the officeholder accounts, Proposition 208 shortened the campaign fund-raising season for local offices and reduced the pool of potential donors by banning contributions from many city commissioners and lobbyists.

A more detailed version of the proposal will return to the council Tuesday. It was passed on an emergency basis Friday because that was the last day for the council to place items on the April ballot.

“We have to communicate with our constituents. When you go to districts and block clubs, what the people are demanding is that you communicate with them more,” Holden said. “Boy Scouts, churches, scholarships, drill teams . . . the kinds of things they ask you to do for them--when you start saying no because you only have $10,000, then you just can’t get much done.”

Councilman Mike Feuer cast the lone vote against the measure Friday, although members Richard Alatorre, Hal Bernson and Svorinich were absent during the vote.

“The voters overwhelmingly passed 208,” Feuer said. “I think we should abide by the will of the people on this reform. I think the voters spoke very loudly and clearly.”