Editorial Editorial (May 21, 2004)

First step on election law

Campaigns for city council in Mountain View are serious affairs, and they cost a lot of money.

In 2002, Laura Brown spent more than $25,000 in an unsuccessful bid for a council seat. Mike Kasperzak and Matt Neely both exceeded the voluntary spending guideline of about $15,900 in that campaign, coming in at $18,729 and $16,640 respectively.

But while candidates can easily keep up to date about where they stand financially, the public must wait to see who is donating to whom from a series of campaign spending reports that often reveal too little, too late.

The city council moved to partially plug that loophole last week when members voted to reduce to $50 (from $100) the campaign contribution amount that the city will make public. In addition, the reports will be posted by the city clerk -- online, in local newspapers and on public television.

In addition, the council action will require that donations received one week before the election be posted five days before the vote, a move to eliminate large, last-minute contributions that in the past have gone unreported until after the election.

Under the new rules, the city will post all disclosure forms online from candidates, as well as independent committees, which often spend substantial sums on campaigns. In 2002, the Mountain View Professional Firefighters union spent nearly $15,000 in support of four candidates, including current Council member Nick Galiotto, and another group spent about $16,000 for virtually the same slate.

This is a good first step for the council, which heard testimony last week from residents concerned about the number of $99 contributions in 2002 who "flew under the radar screen" of the $100 disclosure limit. With amounts of $50 and up being made public, contributors will have a more difficult time hiding their money from public view.

With a better disclosure law in place, the council should try again to put some teeth into the campaign spending limit, which is currently voluntary. If the public is given frequent campaign spending updates, news that one or another candidate is exceeding the limit would be unwelcome publicity, especially as the races go down to the wire.

It just might be enough pressure to force candidates to abide by a reasonable campaign spending limit.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.