|


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!
Councilmans 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:
Whats
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.
|
|