SLO County supervisors OK $25,000 campaign donation cap over hundreds of objections
San Luis Obispo County leaders approved capping candidate campaign donations at $25,000 — far above the state’s default — even though hundreds of residents called and sent letters voicing their objections to the limit.
The county Board of Supervisors on Friday voted 3-1 in favor of the new limit, which leaders set in response to a new California law that will take effect in January. District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson cast the lone dissenting vote.
AB 571 — which sets a statewide limit on individual campaign donations — became law in October 2019. The state limit will be the default in all cities and counties that don’t adopt their own caps before the end of 2020.
The limit is currently set at $4,700, but it will increase to $4,900 in January, said Jay Wierenga, spokesman for the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), which oversees state campaign finance reporting and disclosure.
The $25,000 limit will apply to candidates for 10 county offices, including the five supervisors, the district attorney and the sheriff. The cap does not impact cities, which can set their own contribution limits.
The cap will be enforced by the District Attorney’s Office, not the state FPPC.
The county will foot the bill for local enforcement, which the state would have paid for if supervisors had opted not to enact a county limit.
SLO County residents oppose higher contribution cap
On Friday, hundreds of residents called into the meeting to provide comments on the issue or had their voice messages played live for supervisors to hear. Comments lasted for more than two hours, and hundreds of additional residents sent emails to supervisors about the contribution limit.
Residents overwhelmingly opposed the $25,000 cap, and nearly everyone who commented asked supervisors to default to the state’s $4,700 limit, or even to lower the limit.
Many expressed frustration about what they see as the corrupting influence of big money in local politics. Callers and writers said encouraging large donations makes it more challenging for residents without money and influence to run for office.
“Here in San Luis Obispo County, there is no need to turn local elections into a wealth competition,” wrote Devan Kennifer, a San Luis Obispo resident.
The League of Women Voters of San Luis Obispo County also opposed raising the donation limit and encouraged residents to make their views known to supervisors.
“The proposed ordinance moves our county in the wrong direction with campaign finance reform and will exacerbate the public’s perception that money controls elections, further eroding the public’s confidence in our local elections,” the League’s website reads.
John Peschong leads push for $25,000 cap
District 1 Supervisor John Peschong — who’s been pushing for the board to raise the cap to $25,000 since October — emphasized there’s currently no local donation limit.
Peschong also said the law doesn’t prevent political action committees (PACs) and organizations that campaign on behalf of candidates and ballot measures from receiving unlimited amounts of funding.
“I do not want Sacramento and the governor’s office and the Legislature to tell people in San Luis Obispo County what to do in this particular instance,” he said.
Peschong in October said the $25,000 cap was based on a $23,000 donation made to Ellen Beraud, District 5 Supervisor Debbie Arnold’s opponent in the March primary election.
On Friday, he said the limit is in line with those of other California counties, including Fresno County, where supervisors approved a $30,000 contribution cap in August, according to the Fresno Bee.
“I saw this number, as being compared to those counties, and I thought it fit well for us,” Peschong said.
Some residents have accused Peschong, a partner at political consulting firm Meridian Pacific, of having a conflict of interest, as his business could benefit from the higher cap.
Peschong refused to recuse himself from the issue, claiming his company has not helped any candidates run for office since he was elected and won’t do so until he’s completed his tenure on the board.
Supervisors argue for and against bigger campaign contributions
Gibson said he didn’t agree with Peschong’s reasoning in regard to creating a limit different from the state’s and keeping it in line with those in other counties.
“The argument that we should do one thing or another, simply to resist the state, doesn’t completely resonate with me,” Gibson said. “I think we need to do something that is of benefit to this county and its residents.”
He also expressed concerns about District Attorney Dan Dow enforcing the limit, “given our DA’s current and overt partisanship and his activism in campaigns.”
Gibson challenged the other three supervisors to share the reasoning behind their decision to raise the contribution cap.
“I want to know what you believe in doing this is actually beneficial to the elected democracy of this county,” he said. “What does the $25,000 limit do better than going to a lower limit that we don’t have to spend money to enforce?”
Arnold said she thinks a higher contribution cap would benefit challengers, who may struggle to compete against incumbents when they first run for office.
“It’s the challenger, the person challenging an incumbent, that has the highest hill to climb,” Arnold said. “And again, campaign dollars that come in are spent to get your message out and introduce you to the voters. To me, it’s the challenger, especially a first-time challenger, that really needs the money to do that. I don’t think that having a limit set at $25,000 is detrimental to coming in as challengers.”
District 4 Supervisor Lynn Compton said she didn’t consider the board’s action to be raising the cap, given the fact the county didn’t previously have a contribution limit before the state law was passed.
Compton said she didn’t see any frustration with high-dollar contributions when she was running for re-election in 2018 against challenger Jimmy Paulding, now an Arroyo Grande City Council member.
Paulding received a $40,000 donation from the family of Andrew Holland, an Atascadero resident who died in the San Luis Obispo County Jail.
“I find it interesting that there was no outrage with the largest campaign contribution in history,” Compton said. “Newspapers wouldn’t even pick that up for several months, and now, all of a sudden, when we’ve never had a limit, and we are putting a limit on it ... that becomes problematic.”
Gibson said his office believes about 700 people called or wrote in to express their opinion about the contribution cap, only one of whom was in favor of the higher limit.
“In 14 years on this board, I have never seen public comment go 700 to one against us doing this,” he said.
This story was originally published November 20, 2020 at 2:13 PM.
CORRECTION: This story has been updated to clarify the mission of the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) and the statewide candidate donation limit, which will increase to $4,900 in January 2021.
