Selected Columns from Clean Money by Mel Shapiro

Letter to the Daily Transcript, 13 Feb. 2001:
Politics is the art of misdirection -- diverting the public's attention from what's really happening. 

And so is profiteering at the public's expense. Today we are told that our high electric prices are the fault of environmental extremism, failure to conserve electricity and not enough power plants in California. How strange that two years ago, before deregulation, none of these problems seemed to exist. In reality they don't exist. They are part of a public relations diversionary tactic, to make us forget about the astronomical profits of the energy producing companies and the campaign contributions they give to the state Legislature and the governor. 

Here's how it works. I'll start with SDG&E since it's closest to home. SDG&E's parent company, Sempra, invested a cool $499,967 in campaign contributions last year, according to papers filed with the secretary of state. Did it pay off? Quoting from a Jan. 26 news article, "Sempra Energy Trading's net income increased nearly eightfold, rising from $19 million in 1999 to $155 million last year." Among the recipients of the Sempra largess were State Sen. Steve Peace, who acquired $10,000 for his now-defunct secretary of state campaign, and Senate Majority Leader John Burton, who received $15,000. 

Enron, the Texas energy company, contributed some $171,000 to California politicians last year, including $10,000 to Gov. Davis, who was not even on the ballot. A Jan. 23 news item about Enron stated "the wholesale business, which trades electricity and other commodities, saw earnings nearly triple to $777 million, up from $263 million the year before." 
 

The January headline reads "Profits soar at Reliant Energy." The article goes on to say that this Houston company's income from power sales rose from $26 million in 1999 to $482 million in 2000. Reliant donated $9,000 to Senate Majority Leader Burton and $11,000 to House Speaker Hertzberg. 

Dynegy Inc. is co-owner of a power plant in Carlsbad. A headline for this company read "Dynegy's power-sale profits soar 252 percent." The company gave Burton $11,000 and Hertzberg $6,500. 

Next is Duke Energy, which operates a power plant in Chula Vista. An Associated Press analysis said "the financial pain of California's major utilities translated into a handsome gain for power generator Duke Energy, which more than doubled its revenues in the fourth quarter and topped Wall Street's earnings expectations." Duke gave the governor $10,000 last year and contributed $77,000 to California lawmakers. 

The governor tells us that we must sacrifice for the common good. We must endure more pollution, we must pay higher prices, turn off those lights and turn down the heat even though the weather is cold. 

I'd like to know what sacrifices the energy companies are making. 

Mel Shapiro San Diego 

From the April 2000 newsletter:
WEAR NOWHERE ON CANYONS AND ETHICS!

Councilman’s actions show why San Diego needs an Ethics Commission


By MEL SHAPIRO, Chair,
Research Committee,
San Diego Alliance for Clean Elections.

In a March 15 article, Councilman Byron Wear comments on sewage spills, saying "we need to get those sewer mains out of the canyons." What makes this interesting is the fact that Wear owns a canyon in Encanto where he is now in the process of developing three houses. Wear is a 50% owner of the land, called Pepper View Canyon, located at 65th Street and Varney Drive.

The ownership is listed on his annual financial disclosure statement, and has been listed since he joined the city council in 1995. But the listing contains another phrase, namely, "Sold-In escrow." This phrase has been on his statement for 5 years. Anyone who has ever been involved in real estate knows that escrows don't last 5 years. In fact, 1 year would be unusual. Assessor records show that the property has not been sold and that it is owned by a company called Pepper View Canyon Limited Partnership. It appears that the "Sold-in Escrow" phrase is designed to make people believe that he has no financial interest in the property.

And what about the Pepper View Canyon partnership ? Secretary of State records show Wear to be a general partner. The other general partner is Chris Montgomery, whose name appears on all the permit applications and on the sign advertising that houses will soon be built on the land.

Most people would have a hard time getting a permit to grade and develop in a canyon.

It would be unseemly for a councilman, who happens to be chairman of the Land Use and Housing Committee, to be publicly known as a developer. The importance of this committee was shown in 1997 when the city council voted on changes to the existing land use regulations. Councilwoman Kehoe wanted to make sure that community plans were adhered to in the new rules. Wear voted against this and the matter was referred to his committee. During the debate, Wear never mentions that he owns a canyon that he wants to develop. This despite the fact that the community plan for Encanto says "Preserve and protect the natural canyons and slopes of south Encanto."

The California Government Code states "No public official at any level of state or local government shall make, participate in making or in any way attempt to use his official position to influence a governmental decision in which he knows or has reason to know he has a financial interest." Although public officials are required to list their businesses on the disclosure statement, Wear has never listed his partnership .Every one of the 5 disclosure statements he filed are in violation of the law. The San Diego City Attorney is aware of this. As we know, the City Attorney does not enforce laws against city councilmembers.

Most people would have a hard time getting a permit to grade and develop in a canyon. Not here. Wear's company rented bulldozers which began grading the canyon last year without any permit, but when a resident complained a grading permit was obtained ministerially. Ministerially means that city staff decided no hearing was necessary.

Reynaldo Pisano, chair of the local city authorized community planning group, is very annoyed that his group was not consulted about the grading and destruction of this canyon. But it seems that community plans don't mean too much if the councilman for the district wants to violate them. George Stevens is the councilman for Encanto and is doing his best to grease the wheels for his colleague. One example is where Wear's company asked the City to give up its rights to connect 65th to 66th street through a portion of the canyon, called a "street vacation." The application, signed by Wear's partner, Chris Montgomery, says they have been working with Stevens office and fees have been deferred. It is being processed by city development staff and is supposed to go through a public hearing with a date yet to be determined. If you want more information on this, you won't find it in the San Diego Union.

From the September 1999 newsletter:

Council Candidate Accused of Criminal Violations of State
and Local Campaign Laws


By Mel Shapiro -
Chair, Research Committee


Karen McElliott is a member of the Qualcomm Stadium Advisory Board. She is also a candidate for the San Diego City Council, 5th. district. Information provided to me shows that she committed at least 17 violations of state and local campaign laws. Every violation is a misdemeanor: 

1.) City Ordinance 27.2947; Prohibits business contributions to a council candidate. 

I have in my possession the invitation from Cox Communications showing them holding a fund-raiser for her on July 27, 1999. (Editor's Note: Cox Communications has a license from the City to provide cable service in San Diego) 

2.) Government Code 84211: States that non-monetary contributions must be reported. 

A page for these contributions is in the reporting form which is filed with the San Diego City Clerk. The page is blank. But I have invitations from:
  • a) David and Leslie Cohn for a fund-raiser at Tupelo restaurant. 
  • b.) Ron and Alice Zappardino for a fund-raiser at Top of the Cove restaurant. 
  • c.) Stephen and Marjorie Cushman for a fund-raiser aboard their yacht. 
  • d.) Tom and Kathy Blake for a fund-raiser at their house. 
3.) City Ordinance 27.2941: Limits contributions to $250. 

But 6 of the 8 persons mentioned in item 2 donated $250 in addition to their non-monetary contributions. So they are over the limit. 

4.) Government Code 84211: States that contributions to other candidates must be reported. 

A page is set aside for this in the report. The page is blank. But other campaign reports show candidate McElliot contributed to candidates Pam Slater, Barbara Warden, Charlene Zettel and Casey Gwinn. Gwinn, of course, is the San Diego City Attorney, who is charged with prosecuting campaign violations. He is aware of all the violations. 

From the June 1999 newsletter:
MAYOR GOLDING: POLITICAL ETHICS
AN OXYMORON?

By Mel Shapiro -
Chair, Research Committee 

The San Diego Code of Ethics relating to office-holder conduct is embodied in City Council Policy #000-4 and reads as follows; 
 

" No elected official, officer, appointee or employee shall engage in any enterprise or activity which shall result in any of the following: receiving or accepting, directly or indirectly, any gift or favor from anyone doing business with the City of San Diego under circumstances from which it could be reasonably inferred that such was intended to influence him in his official employment or duties, or as a reward for official action."

The City also has an Administrative Regulation saying;
 
" Persons shall not accept gifts, gratuities or favors of any kind which might reasonably be interpreted as an attempt to influence their actions with respect to City business."

In last month's newsletter I listed the campaign contributions from persons with a financial interest in the Padres ballpark project. To refresh your memory, Mayor Golding got $3,000 from Padres owners and $14,000 from business interests who stand to profit from locating  

the ballpark in East Village. In 1996, John Moores, owner of the Padres, gave $25,000 to the Republican Convention, even though Moores was then a Democrat. It was no secret that the mayor was raising private funds to get the Republicans to come here. 

The mayor and her staff received gifts from the Padres as follows: 

  • February 8, 1998 - 2 flower bouquets to Mayor Golding - $70.00 
  • July 10, 1998 - Dinner at Tupelo American with mayors chief of staff - $20.83 
  • July 17, 1998 - Lunch at Sally's restaurant with Mayor Golding - $16.05. 
  • July 23, 1998 - Dinner at Elephant Bar with Fred Sainz, deputy chief of staff - $17.83 
  • July 26, 1998 - Dinner at TGI Friday with Mayor Golding - $18.45 
  • Oct. 3, 1998 - Tickets to Padres game for Mayor Golding - $184.00 
  • Oct. 19, 1998 - Food and beverage at Grand Hyatt, New York with Mayor Golding - $43.35 
  • Nov. 17, 1998 - Food & bev. at Dobsons with Teresa Stivers of mayor's staff - $23.52. 
  • Nov. 20, 1998 - Food & bev. at Dobsons with mayor's chief of staff - $30.81 
Source; Documents on file with City Clerk. (Editor's Note: Recently San Diego City Attorney Casey Gwin ruled that Charger owner Alex Spanos and Padres owner John Moore did not have to report their gifts to city politicians and employees as they were not "employees" of their organizations and thus did not fall under the lobbying regulations. )
From the May 1999 newsletter:
Connecting the Padres Ballpark and Political Campaign Contributions

By Mel Shapiro - Chair, Research Committee


I've been asked to see if there's any connection between the taxpayer funded $243 million ballpark and campaign contributions to those politicos who make the decisions. Here's what I've found so far.

PADRES OWNERS-MOORES & LUCCHINO

donated as follows:

Mayor Susan Golding: $3,000 for her Senate campaign.
Council member Christine Kehoe: $17,000 for her Congressional campaign.
Council member George Stevens. $1,250
Council member Harry Mathis: $500
Council member Byron Wear: $1,250
Council member Valerie Stallings: $1,500
Council member Juan Vargas: $5,000 for his Congressional campaign.
Council member Barbara Warden: $250

STREET PROPERTIES 
(Owns most of block at 8th and Island in the ballpark district)

Background: The East Village Redevelopment will be done in two phases. Property owners in Phase 1 get the value of their property before the ballpark deal went through, not the current market value. The City buys the property, by condemnation, if necessary.
Phase 2 owners do much better, since they can sell their property at the current higher market price. Street Properties block has been placed in Phase 2.

The owners, the Street family made contributions as follows:

Mayor Golding: $4,000
Council member George Stevens: $100
Council member Byron Wear: $250
Council member Juan Vargas: $2,000
Council member Barbara Warden: $250

OLIVER McMILLAN COMPANIES
(Owns two blocks directly north of the ballpark district, bordering on Market Street.)

Background: Slated for residential and retail development. Originally a problem as to parking, since Oliver did not want to supply it. The City solved this problem by deciding that Centre City Development, an arm of the City, would build a 500 car parking garage.

Oliver McMillan's contributions are as follows:

Mayor Golding; $9,000
Council member Juan Vargas: $5,000
Council member Harry Mathis: $2,000
Council member Byron Wear: $1,700
Council member George Stevens: $$1,500
Coucil member Valerie Stallings: $1,450
Council member Barbara Warden: $1,000 

ACE PARKING
(Largest parking lot  operator in the City.)

Background: Obviously, the ballpark will be a bonanza for parking lot operators, since the 42,000 seat stadium will only have 5,000 parking spaces. In addition, the new parking garage serving the Oliver McMillin property will be managed by Ace Parking.

Ace contributions are as follows:

Mayor Susan Golding: $1,000
Council member Valerie Stallings: $1,500
Council member Barbara Warden: $1,250
Council member George Stevens: $1,000
Council member Juan Vargas: $750
Council member Harry Mathis: $500
Council member Byron Wear: $500


Let Me Count The Ways


By Mel Shapiro - Chair, Research Committee


Douglas Barnhart is a leading general contractor in San Diego. The Port of San Diego gave him the contract for the expansion of Lindbergh Field. The original estimate was $165 million. The current estimate is $238 million. 

Last month, the Port sued Barnhart and the other contractors for construction defects resulting from their work. The Port's lawsuit asks for $5 million in damages. You might conclude that the Port is not happy with Douglas Barnhart. But look again. In February the Port voted to lend the Convention Center $10 million for upgrading their building. And who is the general contractor for the Convention Center? You guessed it: Douglas Barnhart. 

How can this happen? Let me count the ways. 

1.) 6 members of the Barnhart family contribute a total of $4,750 to Susan Golding for Senate. 

2.) 7 Barnharts contribute $1,350 to Councilmember Barbara Warden. 

3.) 6 Barnharts contribute $1,500 to Councilmember Valerie Stallings. 

4.) 2 Barnharts contribute $500 to Councilmember Byron Wear. 

5.) Douglas Barnhart contributes $250 to Councilmember Juan Vargas. 


A somewhat similar event occurred last December at the San Diego City Council. The City has a rebate program for individuals and businesses that install low-flush toilets. For seven years, a company called Volt Viewtech managed the program. But there is competition for this contract, and last year, three companies competed. A City Manager evaluation committee rated the companies, giving Volt Viewtech a score of 91, Honeywell a score of 85, and Pacific Gateway a 56. 

Despite their having the lowest score, Pacific Gateway was awarded the contract, receiving five votes on the city council. Three of the five had received campaign contributions from the CEO of Pacific Gateway, Douglas Perkins. Byron Wear got $500, while councilmembers Warden and Vargas got $250 each. Councilmember McCarty voted for Perkings, even though she got no contributions. But McCarty knows Perkins quite well, as he was her campaign manager when she first ran for the city council.

Special to the Daily Transcript Jan. 27, 1999:
What’s in a name? 

By Mel Shapiro Chair, Research Committee


Scott Barnett, executive director of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association, is quoted extensively in your newspaper. Practically all of the quotes reflect opinions on city of San Diego issues. Mainly because the association calls itself the "watchdog" over city spending and its stationery shows a fierce looking dog on the letterhead. Let's take a closer look at this doggie.

The board of directors is made up of 47 people, 46 representing a business. They are not elected by the members. In fact, the seats on the board are purchased for a price ranging from $2,000 to $5,000.

Although the group is supposed to be a watchdog over local government, two of its directors are part of the government.

Board member Peter Davis is president of Centre City Development Corp., the redevelopment arm of the city. Board member Steve Cushman is on the board of the convention center and the port authority. Both were appointed by the City Council.

Watchdogs can get contracts from the people they're allegedly watching. Douglas Perkins is first vice president of the association. His firm, Pacific Gateway, just received a contract from the city of San Diego to manage the low-flush toilet rebate program.

Executive committee member Mary Ball is a registered lobbyist and represents Cox Cable, which has the cable franchise for a large portion of San Diego. Three board members were mentioned in an article about San Diego's waste disposal system. They all testified at a city council committee meeting about raising fees for recycling. But the three were not there as watchdogs, they were there as lobbyists for the three companies they represented. The three board members are James Ambroso, San Diego Landfill, Scott Harvey of the San Diego County Disposal Association and Johnnie Perkins, representing Allied Waste.

Other lobbyists on the board are Lisa Briggs, representing Pacific Bell, and Nikki Clay, who represents San Diego Landfill and AT&T. Board member Mark Nelson represents the interests of SDG&E, which has a franchise from the City Council.

Thomas Turner, an attorney of the law firm of Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch is on the board. The firm's Web page promotes the firm's "Legislative Advocacy Group." A fancy name for lobbyists.

Other attorneys on the association board are Michael Boyle of Higgs, Fletcher & Mack, Tom May of Luce, Forward and David Geerdes of Gray, Cary, Ware & Friedenrich. All three have a long history of doing legal work for the San Diego City Council. Both the Procopio firm and the Gray, Cary firm are registered lobbyists.

Remember the ill-fated attempt to "divorce" San Diego gas stations from their oil company owners? The city of San Diego refused to join in this effort after being threatened with a lawsuit by Western States Petroleum Association, the oil company lobby. David Fogarty, representing Western States Petroleum, is on the board of the

Taxpayers Association. Doing his watchdog job for us taxpayers, no doubt.

And how can we forget the "ticket guarantee" the city council gave to the San Diego Chargers. The Taxpayers Association gave its blessing to the entire Chargers deal, including the ticket guarantee. Not surprisingly, we find that Jeanne Bonk, from the Chargers, has a seat on the board.In the same vein, we find Cherry Dimeff, from SeaWorld, on the board. SeaWorld leases a large part of Mission Bay from the city. Last November, SeaWorld won an election to remove the height limit for their planned construction. If you look at the ballot pamphlet, you'll find the taxpayers association signing the "yes" argument.

It is not generally known that a toll road is planned to be built from downtown to the border that will be called the San Diego Expressway. Since it will be privately owned, it would require City Council approval. It is being designed by California Transportation Ventures (CTV), with a board member on the taxpayers association. CTV is a subsidiary of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, an international engineering firm. Parsons is also on the board. They are represented by Robert Garin and Gordon Lutes.

Last June the taxpayers endorsed the ballot proposition for expansion of the San Diego Convention Center. They not only endorsed it, they campaigned for it through their political action committee. And from where did the money come for the campaign? City records show them receiving $9,000 from the Hyatt Regency Hotel, which is next door to the convention center. But the taxpayers association campaign mailer makes no mention of this contribution. This is commonly known as "laundering" in the political campaign business.

Alan Randle of Hyatt Regency has a seat on the board. So does Peter Litrenta of Manchester Resorts, majority owner of the Regency and the Marriott Hotel, which also adjoins the convention center. Two San Diego construction companies are also represented on the taxpayer board. Kevin Elliott of Roel Construction, a major builder, and Deborah Ragione from Rick Engineering, which has the city contract for the redesign of the Naval Training Center.

A short time ago, we were voting on the new ballpark for the Padres. An optimistic report on the financial impact was issued by the national firm of Deloitte & Touche, which was paid $400,000 by the city of San Diego. Until this month, Deloitte was on the board of the taxpayers association, represented by Eric Rohner.

Last but not least, board member Jon Walz from John Burnham Co. Burnham has heavy financial interests in downtown redevelopment. The stands taken by the taxpayers association seem to coincide with the stands of the Burnham company.

Needless to say, campaign contributions flow freely from the "watchdogs" to the members of the San Diego City Council. City records show 12 board members gave to the Byron Wear campaign. Eight gave to "Susan Golding for Senate."

These are your "watchdogs." The San Diego media just can't wait to get another quote from them, since they claim to represent all the taxpayers. You can tell that from their name. Especially if you don't look any further.

As Shakespeare said, "What's in a name?" In San Diego, quite a lot.


BACK TO SDACE NEWSRETURN HOME