Following the money

At first blush, it’s a bit surprising that a victory in Newport

Beach’s election didn’t cost more.

The city’s top spender, Councilman Don Webb, only had to pony up

$46,750 to get elected, a veritable bargain compared to what his

colleague, Mayor Steve Bromberg, spent in 2000: $62,500. It’s not

even Councilman Gary Proctor’s $51,900 from that election.

It cost Councilman Gary Adams just $40,000 to defeat

Greenlight-backed Rick Taylor, who spent $32,295.

Councilman Tod Ridgeway, who traveled an easier reelection road

than Webb, spent just $38,500, which is not a whole lot more than

what Councilman John Heffernan spent of his own money to become the

first Greenlight-backed candidate on the council: $30,500.

Losers in 2000 and 2002 spent far more than many of this year’s

winners. Bernie Svalstad, who lost to Councilman Dick Nichols, spent

$59,800. Two years ago, former Councilman Tom Thomson spent $52,902,

while former City Manager Bob Wynn spent $63,886 in the race against

Heffernan.

One reason for the drop in cost might be that in 2000, Newport’s

election hit a record high because of the Greenlight vote on Measure

S and Measure T. In that election, Greenlight opponents spent a

whopping $720,000, including $427,000 from the Irvine Co.

It’s one reason that Bromberg gives for his money-raising and

spending. And given that he would be an incumbent the next time

around, he doubts he’d have to raise as much.

“I was running against a name [Pat Beek],” Bromberg said. “I don’t

think I’d have to do that again.”

Interestingly enough, Bromberg added that such talk at this point

is all “ifs” and hypothetical. Why? He hasn’t decided he will run

again, though he does say the job is one that he loves.

He has had one offer to hold a fund-raiser for him, though.

A candidate we can be fairly sure will not hold a fund-raiser,

Heffernan, also guessed that he wouldn’t have to spend as much since

he’s no longer an unknown, though he is quick to throw caveats on

that about redistricting and who might run against him.

Like Bromberg, Heffernan said he hasn’t decided if he will run

again. But if he does, he will once again not be accepting money.

Heffernan’s status as the one candidate who has no fund-raising

ties makes his push for campaign reform all the more credible.

But he also seems well aware that making changes to a system that

benefits those in power (and those who work with those in power) is,

at best, a steep uphill battle.

“What chance is there, really, for campaign reform in Newport

Beach?” he asked, pointing to campaign tactics such as those employed

by Team Newport in this election.

As reported in the Pilot on Wednesday, Team Newport, which came

out of nowhere a day after the final pre-election filing deadline,

spent a whopping $40,000 of Adams, Ridgeway, Svalstad and Webb’s

money on a glossy -- and it certainly seems, largely effective --

slate mailer. And there was no record of the slate until the end of

January.

Under Heffernan’s suggestions for campaign reform, which include

having all mailers, phone calls and other political “statements”

registered with the city clerk, the Team Newport tactic would have

been available for all to see.

That includes residents. It includes the media (it certainly would

have been a big story in the days leading up to the election). And it

includes Team Newport’s opponent, Greenlight, which spent only $5,300

in the final weeks of the election to help its slate of candidates.

Undoubtedly, had Greenlight leaders known that a collective

$40,000 campaign punch was on the way, they would have spent their

money, which -- having spent $51,800 in 2002 -- was not

insubstantial.

But the group only raised $14,000 in 2002. That number might have

been much higher in reaction to the Team Newport mailing.

Heffernan does not sound convinced that his proposal for reform is

going to have any quick success. Given such reform’s recent history

in this country, it will take quite a groundswell of public opinion

to force change.

The third candidate up for reelection in 2004, Proctor, couldn’t

be reached for comment about his 2004 plans.

GREENLIGHT’S HOPES

A quick glance through Greenlight’s campaign statements suggest

this thinking on the part of the city’s slow-growthers (or

controlled-growthers, which it prefers):

It was banking on Taylor to have the best chance of victory. The

committee gave his campaign $1,470 in the final weeks of the

campaign.

The next biggest hope was Allan Beek, to whom it gave $1,085.

Nichols got a $623 shot, while Madelene Arakelian received $609.

A SMART STRATEGY

A thought on the Team Newport strategy: That’s smart.

And a question on it: While it was legal, would you rather have

known that concerted spending was going on?

WHO SUPPORTS BILL?

Next week: A look at Costa Mesa and school district money. And an

answer to this question: Who gave Planning Commissioner Bill Perkins

$7,750?

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He can be reached at (949)

574-4233 or by e-mail at s.j.cahn@latimes.com.