In the latest installment of the “Follow the Money” series, we examined the details behind what candidates can accept in contributions other than cash. These can include donations of items, supplies, property and professional services. Even though these donations don’t involve an exchange of cash, they must be properly reported by the candidate in his or her finance reports.

Q: What are included in non-monetary campaign donations?

A: There are a wide variety of examples, but basically anything that is of value to a campaign must be reported publicly. Refreshments at a campaign event, or the cost of the meeting place for the event itself, are a couple examples.

These donations must be of fair value. For instance, if a restaurant owner allows a candidate to use a banquet room in his restaurant for a campaign event, the cost of the room must be what it would cost for any person to rent it.

Another example would be loan forgiveness. If a candidate receives a campaign loan from a friend, and a friend later forgives or reduces the amount owed, that needs to be reported.

Q: Are there any regulations governing amounts of these contributions?

A: Yes, and they are just like the regulations on monetary contributions. Individuals may not give a candidate anything worth more than five hundred dollars per election, and organizations are not allowed to contribute to candidates.

Q: In a previous installment, we discussed candidates donating money to their own campaigns. Can a candidate do the same for non-monetary donations?

A: Yes, and just like monetary donations, a candidate can donate as many items to his campaign as he wants. It must be reported differently, though. For instance, if a candidate wants to donate office supplies to his campaign, he can’t go out and buy pens and paper from his personal checking account and “donate” the supplies. He must put that money into his campaign account first, and then buy the supplies from there.

Q: Are there any exceptions to these guidelines?

A: Volunteers who donate their time to help a candidate, with no expectation of reimbursement, would not be considered in violation of the limit on service donations.

Councilman Carl DeMaio strongly supports the convention center expansion and the hotel tax that will fund it. In turn, he’s attracting the financial support of local hoteliers, caterers and event planners in his bid for mayor.

Our analysis of campaign finance documents shows companies in the hospitality and tourism industry have donated at least $23,000 to DeMaio’s campaign. That’s nearly three times what they’ve donated to his competitors.

As councilman, DeMaio supported the creation of a taxing district that would add a one-to-three-percent surcharge on city hotel rooms. Hotel owners approved that tax on Tuesday.

Included in the industry’s donations is $4,175 from members and relatives of the San Diego Convention & Visitors Bureau board for fiscal years 2012 and 2011. ConVis is a private non-profit group of organizations that market county tourism.

Last month, DeMaio voted with the council majority to approve the switch of convention marketing duties from the public convention center board to ConVis. The move was criticized as a power play to get hotel owners to approve the room tax.

In a brief interview, DeMaio said these donors are no different than his others — their expectation is that he will “clean up the mess in City Hall.”

The convention center expansion has been a main issue in the mayoral race. Candidates District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis and Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher approve of the convention center’s expansion, though they have disagreed with the financing plan.

Dumanis’ campaign has received at least $8,600 from the hospitality industry, including $700 from ConVis board members and relatives. Fletcher has received at least $9,150, with $1,100 coming from board members.

Congressman Bob Filner, who opposes the tax and expansion plans, has received less than $300 in donations from hoteliers. No board members contributed to his campaign.

Filner has challenged DeMaio publicly and repeatedly about his support for the tax and the convention center expansion. He jumped on De Maio during a televised debate last week when DeMaio said the hotel tax wasn’t public money.

DeMaio said the center’s expansion was “critical to the economy” and that the transfer of marketing to ConVis would better the chances of bringing large events to the city. He also defended the hotel surcharge.

“The last two convention center expansions involved public money through the TOT, transient occupancy tax,” DeMaio said. “Under my Convention Center expansion proposal, the hoteliers will have to take the responsibility for financing the expansion.”

He added: “I believe that’s fair because taxpayers funded phase one and phase two of the convention center. It’s time for the business community to take the responsibility of phase three.”

Filner challenged the assertion.

“How can you call the vote on the transient occupancy tax not taxpayer-funded?” Filner asked. “It is a public tax and you’ve given the right to vote on that to a private group.”

To analyze the donations candidates received from the hospitality industry, Investigative Newsource looked for any donation from a person or company involved with area hotels, lodging, catering, parking or event planning, as well as any donations from board members listed on the ConVis website for fiscal years 2011 and 2012.

You can see our list of identified donors here.

San Diego’s primary election is less than two months away, and candidates are raising and spending gobs of campaign cash. Limits on donations, loans and expenditures are strictly governed by the San Diego Ethics Commission, and the rules can be confusing. We’ve put together an occasional series to help you understand local campaign finance law and follow the money yourself. Our first installments tackle self-financing a campaign, contribution limits and campaign literature regulations.

Self-financing a campaign

This year is expected to be a record-breaker in political spending across San Diego.  Candidates in some of the city’s most contested elections have already lent and given their campaign large sums of money. Self-loans and donations are good ways to increase a campaign’s bottom line, but there are key differences between the two practices.

Q: What are they?
A: When a candidate lends himself money, he expects to raise enough to pay himself back. When he donates money, that’s money he doesn’t expect to get back. Also, candidates running for office in San Diego can lend themselves only $100,000 at a time, but there’s no limit on how much they can donate to themselves.

Q: Why do candidates give themselves money?
A: There could be a number of reasons. The candidate may simply need the extra money for campaign expenses. But political analysts also say it’s a matter of perception. If it looks like your campaign has a lot of cash, you look more successful and, thus, you’ll raise more from donors.

Q: Who’s doing this in local races?
A: Carl DeMaio, who’s running for mayor, has already lent and given himself quite a bit. He’s donated to his campaign about $390,000 as of March 17. He’s lent himself around $110,000, but has paid about half of that back. DeMaio’s competitors have pitched into their campaigns, too, just on a smaller scale. Bonnie Dumanis has lent her campaign $10,000; Nathan Fletcher has donated $500 to his campaign. As far as perception goes, the mayor’s race is a good example. In raw numbers, Carl DeMaio has raised the most money in the mayor’s race. But if you take away what’s he’s given to himself, Nathan Fletcher’s actually raised more outside cash.

To look up any city candidate’s campaign finance filings, go here.

Donation limits

Q: What limits are placed on donors?
A: San Diego has a pretty low ceiling on contributions. Individuals are limited to giving up to $500 to a candidate per election. That means if you donate $500 to Candidate A in the primary, and she wins and moves on to the general election in November, only then can you donate another $500 to her campaign. Also, only individuals can make donations. Corporations or partnerships are not allowed to contribute to city candidates.

Q: What about the independent expenditure committees that we’ve heard so much about?
A: That’s a little different. With independent expenditure committees, you’re not actually donating to a candidate. You’re donating to a committee that, by law, must not coordinate its efforts with a candidate. And there are no limits on donations to independent expenditure committees in the city. We will have more on independent expenditure committees soon, since they can be complicated.

Q: What are the rules for donations to committees that are for or against a ballot measure?
A: There are no donation limits there, either. The thought is that money can’t influence a ballot measure like it might influence a prospective officeholder.

Disclosures for campaign materials

This is the time of year when voters start finding their mailboxes stuffed with campaign mailers, and their phones ringing with campaign polls and robocalls. Campaign committees have to abide by specific regulations when it comes to telling voters exactly who’s behind those fliers and phone calls.

Q: How can voters find out who’s paid for a campaign filer or door hanger?
A: According to local law, any campaign literature, be it door hangers, news ads, mailers or posters, must say “Paid for by,” followed by the name of the candidate or committee that paid for the materials. It also must disclose the address and city of the committee and candidate, all in 12-point type. That’s different from state law, which only requires 6-point type.

Q: Are there any exceptions?
A: Yes, if fewer than two hundred of the campaign materials are created, there’s no requirement for a disclosure line.

Q: What about telephone calls from campaigns?
A: If a candidate’s committee calls more than 500 voters, the message must say “paid for” or “on behalf of” the candidate. The committee must also keep a copy of the phone message’s transcript, along with a tally of phone calls made, for four years.

Q: If there’s no disclosure on a mailer, is there a place that takes complaints from voters?
A: San Diego city campaign finance law is governed by the San Diego Ethics Commission. You can contact them if you have questions about campaign literature you’ve received.

As the June primary nears, candidates running for federal office in the 52nd and 51st Congressional Districts are drumming up support for their campaigns. Federal campaign finance reports the candidates filed over the weekend show Rep. Brian Bilbray is far ahead of his Democratic and Republican opponents vying for the seat in the 52nd.

Bilbray’s campaign has brought in just more than $1 million overall, and he has outraised all of his opponents combined in cash from donors and political action committees (PACs). The congressman has raised more than half of his money from PACs, most of which are based in Washington, D.C., and Virginia.

Port Commissioner Scott Peters has raised twice as much cash as his democratic opponent Lori Saladaña as they battle to make it through the primary in the 52nd. Peters’ campaign has brought in about $457,000 compared to Saldaña’s $214,000 since both committees started fundraising.

John Stahl, another Republican running in the 52nd, has a war chest second only in size to Bilbray’s, but almost all of that money has come from his personal loans to his campaign.

California State Senator Juan Vargas has also significantly outraised his opponent, Denise Moreno Ducheny, in his campaign to take the seat in the 51st Congressional District. Vargas has raised more than $400,000 while Ducheny has brought in about $210,000.

About half of Vargas’ cash has come from PACs and other committees, and he has loaned his campaign $60,000.

The graphic below breaks down the money flowing into candidates’ coffers by cash from donors, cash from committees such as PACs and how much of their own money they’re putting into the race.

Congressman Bob Filner has cited “inaccuracies” in our recent reporting on his remarks concerning the Port of San Diego — claiming the numbers prior to 2003 “Were not $4 billion.”

“[The ‘more than $4 billion’ numbers were from] this administration,” he said during an interview on KPBS Evening Edition, claiming he told Newsource the “no commerce” quote was meant for years “before that.’”

We just pulled up tonnage data from the Pacific Maritime Association, which goes back to 1995. This data is calculated using something called “revenue tonnage,” which takes into account worker hours and uses a formula to arrive at the total. So while these numbers do not represent the actual tonnage or overall value, they are closely related to both — and consistent in showing the port’s growth throughout the years prior to 2003.

Once again, Filner’s claims are wrong. The volume, according to the data, has nothing to do with the “current administration.”

(Note: We could not use actual tonnage or values because the Port of San Diego has delayed releasing the information).

Investigative Newsource sat down with mayoral candidate Bob Filner for a talk about the Port of San Diego on March 2, 2012. Filner, who represents California’s 51st Congressional District, told Newsource, “I’ve made [the Port of San Diego] the chief economic point of my campaign.”

Yet during a fact-check of Filner’s interview, we noticed a few important claims made by the candidate that merited further review. What we found were a number of issues about which the Congressman was incorrect. What’s more, the Congressman has made many of these claims in the past — almost verbatim — while speaking with other news outlets.

Lorena Gonzalez, the CEO and Secretary-Treasurer of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, was surprised by many of Filner’s claims. Gonzalez and the Council support Filner’s bid for mayor, but she told Newsource on Monday that this was the first time she’d heard any of these claims.

“I don’t think he’ll be writing the policy,” Gonzalez said, referring to what would happen if Filner were elected. “I could be wrong, I hope not.”

“…Not to excuse his wrong figures, because I think in some ways it’s inexcusable,” she said. “You really have to be prepared and he needs to prepare himself…”

We have laid these issues out below, one at a time. Below each of Filner’s claims lies a fact- check paragraph. Below that — Filner’s response to the data, as quoted from a recent follow- up phone interview with the Congressman.

Claim #1 — “Zero commerce”

Regarding the Port of San Diego, Filner said:

“It’s a great tourist destination and a spot that we put a lot of hotels on. But up until a few years ago, we’ve had zero commerce. Zero. That is, there’s no loading and unloading of vessels. And the way the port looked at things for decades was, ‘that’s dirty, and San Diego is clean. And we don’t want dirty stuff here.’ So we don’t have dirty docks, we don’t have dirty longshoremen. And it’s been the policy, literally, of the port not to have commerce.”

When Filner was later given a chance to correct himself, he said: “Virtually nothing has come into this port… we’ve brought literally nothing into this port.”

Fact check:

At no point in the history of the port has it not had commerce. In fact, the port of San Diego has brought in more than $4 billion in imports alone every year since 2003, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Foreign Trade Division — which monitors the import and export data of shipments into and out of the U.S.

In total, more than a million tons of cement, fuel, and lumber were offloaded in 2011, along with 272,168 vehicles, according to port figures, which are based on bills of lading received with every shipment.

Filner’s response: “I don’t know where those numbers come from.”

When Newsource told Filner the numbers are from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Foreign Trade Division and the port itself, the Congressman said, “Show me a ship that comes in here. There’s no way to unload or load. It’s close to zero. We are not a port. You can argue over what the statistics are, but there’s no infrastructure for doing anything. You cannot call San Diego a port.”

Source: U.S. Census Bureau Foreign Trade Division

Claim #2 — “A dozen longshoremen”

Regarding the workers at the port, Filner said:

“Up until five, ten years ago, we had like a dozen longshoremen in all of San Diego. L.A. has thousands and thousands, we have a dozen.”

Fact check:

The Port of San Diego had 132 registered longshoremen last year, according to the 2011 report by the Pacific Maritime Association — self-described as the “labor relations arm of the West Coast maritime industry” that processes payroll information for longshore workers. Five years ago, in 2007, there were even more — 148 registered longshoremen. Ten years ago, in 2002, there were 73 registered longshoremen. And in 1990 — the oldest data available online through the Pacific Maritime Association’s website — there were 69 registered longshoremen.

Filner’s response: “Someone told me [those numbers] about ten years ago.” Filner then said the numbers don’t matter, whether it’s a dozen or a few dozen — the port needs hundreds if not thousands more workers. Newsource then brought an August 2011 CityBeat interview to Filner’s attention in which the Congressman was quoted as saying, “Can you imagine having 100 [longshoremen]?”

“I don’t remember saying that,” Filner told Newsource. “Someone told me we had a dozen, this was from the Union. I may have misremembered or something, but there’s a handful here. I don’t care if its 50, I don’t care if it’s 68 — compare that with thousands.”

Claim #3 — A “niche market”

Regarding his plans for the port’s future, Filner said:

“What if we had a niche market for bulk materials? People would save a lot of time, and therefore money, by coming to San Diego instead of to Long Beach or L.A.”

When Newsource attempted to correct Filner by telling him that San Diego is, and has always been, a “niche port” for, specifically, bulk materials, he responded: “Virtually nothing has come into this port.”

Later on in the conversation, Filner brought up the “bulk” market again: “I mean we don’t have to renovate, we don’t have to change, because we don’t have anything! So what if we built to meet whatever the demands were? If it were for bulk loading? If it were for a certain, I don’t know, whatever the modernization was required. What if we did that?”

Fact check:

The port of San Diego has never been equipped to compete with the massive ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and therefore has always served as a niche market for non-containerized commodities — such as cars, cement, sand, lumber, fuel, and windmill parts — which do not need nearly the same amount of land that containerized shipments do once they are offloaded from a ship. These commodities are considered “bulk” or “breakbulk” commodities, meaning they aren’t loaded or shipped in standard containers — and they have made up the majority of shipments offloaded at the port nearly every year throughout the last twenty years, according to statistical data from the Pacific Maritime Association.

Filner’s response:

“Go down there any day and you could never find a ship,” he said. “The guys in National City have a lumberyard so maybe they brought in some lumber, I don’t know. It’s not a port. You don’t have the volume. You don’t have anything here. San Diego is simply not a maritime place.”

Claim #4 — “The first floating port”

(Note: Filner was not asked to respond to this claim during the follow-up phone call)

When asked what he would do differently for the port as mayor of San Diego, Filner said:

“…when you talk about climate change, our coast might not be there… You’ve got to think through these things, even though half the Congress thinks climate change doesn’t exist. So there are people talking about floating ports. What if we were the first floating port?…That is, you build your infrastructure as much as a mile offshore and you have taxi or ferry ways to come in. But you better start thinking about what happens if our coastline doesn’t exist anymore. What are LA and Long Beach going to do then? It’s a whole new world…”

Fact check:

The idea of San Diego as the nation’s first floating port seems “highly unfeasible,” according to Joel Valenzuela, the Director of Maritime Operations for the Port of San Diego. “…Especially with environmental regulations in California,” he said. “It’s very hard to create a new pier, much less create a floating port.”

Peter Hall, an expert in seaports, port cities and logistics and a professor at Vancouver’s Simon Fraser University, said the idea of a floating terminal is “novel, to say the least.”
And the idea that climate change will eliminate the coastline “is clearly wrong.”

“I have seen one example of a floating pier for cargo… in Portland, Oregon,” he wrote in an email to Newsource on March 30, 2012. “But this was… self-propelled, relatively light cargo, nothing as heavy as a container or something else that requires a crane,” he wrote.

Hall then alluded to the idea as akin to a prank.

“First of April’s coming up, eh?” he asked Newsource.

Tenants of Oceanside’s seventeen mobile home parks have enjoyed controlled rent since 1984.

Oceanside is one of the last San Diego County cities with rent caps on mobile home lots, and last year, the city council voted to allow park owners to increase rents to market value when current residents moved or passed away.

A backlash from tenants followed, and the issue is going to the voters in June.

If city residents approve Proposition E, they will affirm the council’s action and rent control will gradually disappear.

Like any election, people have taken sides with their pocketbooks.

As of March 17, a park residents committee raised about $42,000 in mostly small donations from more than 100 donors to fight the measure. Eighty-two percent of those donors listed their occupation as “retired.” The committee has used the money for office supplies and door hangers, according to their most recent campaign finance filing.

On the other side, park owners have contributed heavily, raising nearly $270,000 — $107,000 in the past three months alone. Some donated twenty thousand dollars or more to the cause. They’ve spent the money on media ads, mailers and campaign consulting from firms in California and Washington, D.C., according to their filing.

Tim Sheahan, a volunteer working with tenants on defeating the measure, said it’s clear the park owners have an advantage in fundraising.

“They have very deep pockets,” he said, “and it was our money to start with that we paid in rent that they are using to try to gain even further advantage on homeowners.”

Sheahan said most mobile home owners are retirees on fixed incomes, and if Oceanside enacts vacancy decontrol, it would make it difficult to sell their homes.

But park owners say they just want a fair rent. Amy Epsten, an Oceanside park owner and chair of the “Yes on E” committee, said her group will spend as much as it takes to inform voters and fight “misinformation.” She emphasized that the ordinance will not affect rent prices of current residents.

“It’s a confusing issue and it’s an emotional issue,” she said. “Once people understand it, they’re on board. But, yeah, we have to spend our time and money educating the public.”

There is no limit on how much a person or company can donate to either committee.

Councilman Carl DeMaio is the single largest contributor to candidate campaigns so far in the City of San Diego. He has dumped about $450,000 into his own campaign coffers through contributions and loans.

As the mayoral candidates filed another set of campaign finance reports yesterday, DeMaio’s self-financing helped put him on top in terms of fundraising. He brought in $286,313 in the first two and a half months of 2012, which brings his total receipts for the election to more than $1.2 million.

Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher came in second in total fundraising with $218,000 in cash so far this year, and about $964,000 in total receipts for the election. But, when DeMaio’s own money is taken out of the equation, Fletcher leads in fundraising from donors outside his own campaign.

San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis trailed both of her Republican opponents, posting $118,000 in cash raised so far this year, and more than $600,000 total for the election.

Congressman Bob Filner, the lone Democrat in the race, has brought in $99,000 in cash this year, and has gathered about $320,000 in total receipts since January of last year.

City Council Districts 1 and 7 are heating up in terms of fundraising. District 1 candidate Raymond Ellis has outraised incumbent Sherri Lightner so far this election by more than $60,0000.

Matthew Kostrinsky and Scott Sherman are posting big numbers in the race for the Distrcit 7 seat, and both have just less than $80,000 in cash on hand.

Click on the column headings to sort by each fundraising figure.

Transparency Laws Don’t All Work as Expected

California has a maze of laws written to make government transparent and to diminish the risks of dishonesty, favoritism and conflicts of interest, but sometimes there are gaps between what the laws say and what they actually do.

Money and Politics

California has some of the toughest campaign finance disclosure laws in the country. But when it comes to how much people can donate, there are plenty of loopholes to be exploited by savvy donors.