Soft Money Corrupts and The Union's Bottom Line

September 12, 2002

Dear Editor,

Soft money is corrupting Santa Monica City Council elections. Soft money is money which flows through a loophole to allow a candidate to evade the campaign finance limits. Santa Monica's campaign finance law $250 limit is routinely evaded by a few candidates who do not report the enormous soft money they receive. These unfair City Council elections will end if Measure HH is approved by the voters this November.

Do the math. Aside from the incumbents, the six independent challengers for the City Council have so far raised COLLECTIVELY only $2,074. Although one citywide mailing costs more than $15,000, independent candidates typically raise less than $8,000 each.

Meanwhile the three candidates endorsed by the ruling quasi-political party receive a massive $200,000 soft money campaign which includes multiple campaign mailings (often with the candidate's pictures and their messages), professional political consultants, telephone boiler rooms, and scores of election day helpers to take "identified" workers to the poles. $6,000 vs. $200,000? That is like a singing contest where the independent candidate must sing alone while the political party's candidate is allowed to bring in the Mormon Tabernacle Choir!

This absurdly UN-LEVEL playing field violates fundamental freedoms, the freedom of free and open political speech with the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse sources. Santa Monica's soft-money-dominated elections is reminiscent of third world political farces where entrenched politicians create similar insurmountable obstacles to prevent competition.

Where are the cries of outrage and shouts of "Foul Play" from our City Council majority? Where are the demands to establish a righteous, democratic process to insure that the First Amendment right to political speech will not be drowned out by soft money? Look closely. Yes, the members of the council majority are the PRIMARY BENEFICIARIES OF THE SOFT MONEY.

Due to the corrupting influence of this huge soft money, the November election already has been decided. In practical terms, the only question is whether one Councilmember, Robert Holbrook, can raise enough hard money required to get out his message against the gigantic $200,000 soft money campaign for the three endorsed candidates.

Measure HH will stop this anti-democratic abuse by eliminating the need to raise big money to run a City Council campaign. Measure HH will create compact City Council election districts where candidates can get out their messages with a small campaign budget. All that a candidate needs are good character, experience, a healthy vision of the future, a few hundred dollars for photocopying, friends using their telephones, time to attend neighborhood meet-the-candidate coffees, and a good pair of walking shoes.

HH will open the door for more people to run for the City Council, and bring more diversity and fresh blood to government. With HH, no longer will any singer be drowned out by a massive choir.

Paul DeSantis

Editor's note Paul DeSantis is the author of Measure HH and a member of the Yes on Measure HH (VERITAS) Committee

September 10, 2002

Dear Editor:

During her entire time promoting the Living Wage, Vivian Rothstein always identified herself as a local activist and leader of SMART, hiding the fact that she was a paid union organizer. It was only after my disclosure that she confirmed being a member of H.E.R.E. Obviously, being paid $65,000 per annum by out of town interests may not have lent too much credibility to her cause or made for good public relations.

Her devotion to improve the lives of thousands of workers in Santa Monica hotels is specifically targeted to only those who work in a very specific geographic location in businesses with specific revenue criteria, in short, all those hotels she is being paid to unionize.

So far, she has not had too much success convincing these employees that she really has their best interests in mind. Ms. Rothstein, her union and SMART supporters defend and promote a Living Wage ordinance and urge voters to do likewise. Why then, Ms. Rothstein, are the workers of your union specifically excluded from any passage of a Living Wage ordinance?

Generating union dues and fattening union coffers is the bottom line of the business you represent. Too bad if the employees get shortchanged in accomplishing that objective.

For the benefit of the voters, here is paragraph 7 in the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the two Santa Monica union hotels and Local 814:

7. Preemption and Coordination:
(a) Intent of the Parties. The wages and economic benefits provided to Hotel employees pursuant to this Agreement were agreed upon by the parties as the result of collective bargaining pursuant to and in full compliance with federal law. It is therefore the intention and understanding of the parties that no ordinance, regulation, or similar pronouncement by the City of Santa Monica may be interpreted to require an increase in or modification of the wages or economic benefits for the covered classifications set forth in Appendix A. Local 814 specifically agrees that it will not use or attempt to use such an ordinance, regulation, or similar pronouncement of the City of Santa Monica as the basis of any legal or public argument that wages and/or economic benefits set forth herein should be increased.

Ms. Rothstein states in her letter (LETTERS: "Full Disclosure," Sept. 5) that she feels a responsibility to correct an unjust situation. She obviously now should know where to start!

Sincerely,

Klaus Mennekes
General Manager and Vice President
Hotel Casa del Mar