Front Page  »  

SLO County supervisors violate campaign disclosure laws

March 28, 2014
Adam Hill

Adam Hill

By KAREN VELIE

Two members of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors violated the Political Reform Act this year, according to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).

Developer Gary Grossman donated $1,000 to Adam Hill  the same week the supervisor attended a groundbreaking for one of Grossman’s Pismo Beach developments. Even so, on Hill’s campaign disclosure form Grossman is listed as retired.

Because of the misstatement, Hill is required to return Grossman’s $1,000 donation.

On Tuesday, the FPPC sent warning letters to Hill and Supervisor Caren Ray. Ray violated campaign disclosure rules by failing to provide addresses for some of her donors, including Grossman who has donated more than $14,000 to Ray’s campaign.

During the last reporting period, Hill received $22,899 in donations, primarily from developers with projects in front of the county and business owners with contracts with the county. Contributors include Grossman — seeking to develop the former Dalidio Ranch, Postcard Properties — which is working to build a hotel in Avila Beach, developer Andy Mangano, Ryan Comerford – has the golf course management contract for several county courses and Frank Kelton who contracts for ambulance services.

…..


Loading...
Subjects:                     
Related:


136 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

BREAKING NEWS — April 2


Caren Ray deleted her erroneous attack on Lynn Compton from her Elect Caren Ray Facebook page! Earlier this week, Caren Ray incorrectly posted:


[Lynn Compton] and her husband have put more than $34,000 of their own money into her campaign – almost 43% of all she has raised.


I pointed out here (below) that Caren’s 43% claim was way off the mark:


The correct figure is 25.92% (as of March 31). The 43% claim is erroneous, as follows: Compton reports $141,077.02 total raised [Source: 2013, 3-17-14, and recent 497 forms]. Compton and her husband contributed a $22,500 loan and $14,064.67 in non-monetary [Source: 2013 & 3-17-2014 460 forms]. That’s a total contribution (loan and non-monetary) of $36,564.67 from her family. Dividing by $141,077.02 is 25.92%, NOT 43%.


Caren Ray has apparently conceded to proper math. She has removed her erroneous and false attack on Lynn Compton.


0

Today, Caren Ray posted this bizarre campaign contribution bar chart to her election web site.


I’m not sure what Caren Ray is trying to say—in my opinion, it make her look bad ($25,000+ developer money coming from outside her district).


But what I do know, is the numbers don’t add up. Caren’s bar chart attributes around $101,000 to Lynn Compton, but Lynn has raised over $141,000 to date. Caren has intentionally omitted $40,000 of Lynn’s contributions from her chart!


0

Today, Caren Ray posted this bizarre campaign contribution bar chart to <a href="http://electcarenray.com/ray-compton-byrd-supervisor-campaign-contribution-break-down/"her election web site.


I’m not sure what Caren Ray is trying to say—in my opinion, it make her look bad ($25,000+ developer money coming from outside her district).


But what I do know, is the numbers don’t add up. Caren’s bar chart attributes around $101,000 to Lynn Compton, but Lynn has raised over $141,000 to date. Caren has intentionally omitted $40,000 of Lynn’s contributions from her chart!


0

SCRATCH THAT ONE. RE-POSTED ABOVE.


0

On her Facebook page, Caren Ray incorrectly writes:


The cash that’s flowing is out of Compton’s pocketbook! She and her husband have put more than $34,000 of their own money into her campaign – almost 43% of all she has raised.


Caren Ray is wrong.


The correct figure is 25.92% (as of March 31). The 43% claim is erroneous, as follows: Compton reports $141,077.02 total raised [Source: 2013, 3-17-14, and recent 497 forms]. Compton and her husband contributed a $22,500 loan and $14,064.67 in non-monetary [Source: 2013 & 3-17-2014 460 forms]. That’s a total contribution (loan and non-monetary) of $36,564.67 from her family. Dividing by $141,077.02 is 25.92%, NOT 43%.


When challenged by a poster, Caren Ray wrote:


Oh! Those figures on Lynn Compton’s contributions from from Cal Coast News! I guess they don’t bother looking at official records to find information.


Except, Cal Coast News did look at the official records—the same official records Caren Ray couldn’t fill out correctly for her own campaign. Cal Coast News (unlike the Tribune) didn’t omit 2013 contributions. The Tribune also failed to account for campaign expenses, improperly deducting money spent from the total reported as raised.


Even so, Caren Ray doubled-down in a more recent post:


Lynn Compton is her own largest campaign donor, spending more than $34,000 on her campaign – almost 43% of all the cash she’s raked in. Caren Ray has funded her campaign with hundreds of donations from regular folks who want her to continue to represent them on the Board of Supervisors.


Again, Caren Ray fails in the ability to read, understand, and correctly fill out campaign reporting forms. Compton and her husband (to date) contributed (not spent) 25.92% of her contributions. And it’s not all “cash” as Caren Ray writes in her inflammatory and wrong-headed attack. $14,064.67 was non-monetary contributions.


Further, Compton has received far more individual contributions “from regular folks who want her” on the Board of Supervisors than has Caren Ray.


The public attack posts by Caren Ray are factually wrong, just like her FPPC filings. Let’s see if she recants and calls it “clerical errors”.


0

How did you arrive at “far more individual contribution”?

I assume you are including out of county money that she has flowing in to influence the local race. It’s something like 25% of the total versus 3% for Ray


0

Not “contribution”. I wrote “contributions“, as in plural or many. Lynn Compton has far more individual contributors.


Here’s a question for ya: Why is Caren Ray spending most of her money outside of the county? Caren Ray sent 81.3% of her 2014 expenditures ($15,795 out of a total $19,417) outside of our county’s economy. [Source: Caren Ray, 3-17-14 FPPC 460 Form]


0

OK, contributions. How did you arrive at “far more”


0

More itemized contributions, the “unitemized” amount (<$100) is larger, and more Form 497 filings. Plus, I understand almost no one turned up at Caren's fundraiser at the Cool residence.


0

I have not seen the post but is sounds like it should have be worded differently like for every dollar contributed the Compton’s invested 43 cents. Which is true. Or maybe the Compton’s are significantly self funding having invested $36,000 which is equal to 43% of others donations


0

The 43% figure is simply not true, and I provided Caren’s entire post, and my entire rebuttal and mathematical proof of Caren Ray’s erroneous claim.


0

Well like so much of these things it’s how you chose to present it as you and I both have played with to argue our points.

$36,000 is what the Compton’s have put in. About 83,000 is what they have raised. Summary pages line 1, monetary contributions, both filings totaled.

43,000 / 83,000 = 43%


0

Oops, typo. 36,000/83,000 is 43%


0

Except $83,000 is a fallacious amount. Compton has raised $141,077.02 to date. [Source: Form 460s dated 1/31/14 & 3/17/14; Form 497s dated 3/24, 3/26, 3/31.]


$36,564.67 / $141,077.02 = 25.92%, not 43%


0

You and Caren Ray have erred. You should be using Line 5 (Total Contributions).


Summary Page, Line 1 (Cash Contributions) does not include “Loans Received” and “Nonmonetary Contributions”! Your math excludes over $53,500 of campaign contributions!! You also omit $4,500 contributed in the last two weeks. [Source: Form 497 filings dated 3/24, 3/26, 3/31.]


The $36,564.67 from Compton and her husband was ENTIRELY a “Loan” and “Nonmonetary Contributions”, so how can you calculate the percentage of Cash Contributions (Line 1) when Loans/Nonmonetary are not included in Cash Contributions!!??


$36,564.67 / $141,077.02 = 25.92%, not 43%


0
1 … 3 4 5