ESCONDIDO — The city has reset its campaign contribution limits to match the state’s new default limits, raising local limits by $3,700 for the mayor and treasurer seats and more than $4,400 for council members.
In November 2020, the City Council set a $1,000 contribution limit for council members and a $1,750 limit for the seats of mayor and treasurer. Those limits would increase by $50 per election cycle, putting the 2024 election limits at $1,050 for council members and $1,800 for the mayor and treasurer.
That same year, the state legislature set default campaign contributions under Assembly Bill 571 at $5,500, which would apply to any municipality that hadn’t established its contribution limits.
Then, in 2022, the state passed Senate Bill 1439, which broadened the state’s Levine Act – which applies to proceedings involving licenses, permits and other entitlements of use – by including local elected officials to “conflict out” of certain proceedings involving persons that made contributions to their respective political campaigns.
The new law also prevents officials from accepting, soliciting or directing contributions exceeding $250 from a party to or participant in the proceeding or their agents while a proceeding is pending and for 12 months after the final decision of that proceeding.
According to the Fair Political Practices Commission, a “pending proceeding” occurs when the decision is before a governing body officer – including when the item is placed on an agenda for discussion – or if it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will come before the officer.
Councilmember Mike Morasco, who brought the discussion to change the city’s campaign contribution limits before the rest of the council, said the city should follow the state’s contribution limits since it must follow other state restrictions on campaign contributions and donations.
“The reason I brought this forward is because of recent California law, which has significantly impacted what local municipalities can or cannot do as far as contribution limits as well as utilization of those funds as it pertains to elected officials as they sit on the dais and make decisions,” Morasco said. “In essence, it has completely placed restrictions that preclude any type of pay-for-play as far as campaign donations are concerned…it doesn’t matter if someone contributes $251 or if they contribute $2,500 or $5,000 – everyone falls into the same rules and regulations that have been placed upon us by the state.”
The City Council approved repealing the city’s campaign contribution limits in favor of adopting the state’s limits instead, bumping limits from $1,050 for council members and $1,800 for the mayor and treasurer to a universal $5,500 limit in a 4-1 vote on Sept. 13.
Councilmember Consuelo Martinez was the sole vote against changing the campaign contribution limits, noting that the lower local limits were only approved a few years ago. She was also surprised that Morasco had changed his mind since he had previously agreed to the lower contribution limits.
“We don’t need such high limits,” Martinez said. “I understand there are more restrictions at the state level, and that makes sense – I don’t think any of us want there to be pay-to-play; that’s probably why they had to rein in on that – but I think we should keep our limits, I don’t think they’re too low or high, I think it was a good compromise we had with the majority of the council then.”
Martinez added that she didn’t like the timing of the “outrageous” $5,500 campaign contribution limit change, considering that the 2024 election cycle is approaching.
“That is just way too high, and I don’t think anyone should donate that much money to a politician in any race,” she said.
