RULING ON SLATES RELEASED LEGAL OPTIONS LIMITED.

Byline: Cecilia Chan Staff Writer

THOUSAND OAKS - The city attorney has determined that any attempts by the city to level the playing field in fundraising for candidates who run as a team would be unconstitutional.

However, the council could consider having slate candidates register with the elections officials and disclose any joint campaign expenditures, said City Attorney Mark Sellers in his report to be discussed Tuesday.

Councilman Michael Markey, who proposed the city look into regulating slates so they don't have an unfair edge over independent candidates, declined to comment on Sellers' report because he had not had time to review it.

However, Councilwoman Linda Parks, who ran on a slate in 1996 and voted against having Sellers consider the idea, said the city doesn't need new regulations.

``Before we insist on more laws why not work on enforcing the ones we have,'' said Parks. ``They seem unable to enforce the existing campaign laws.''

Parks referred specifically to the last council election, where a prominent businesswoman failed initially to disclose her $1,803 contribution that financed a campaign hit piece. Although the City Attorney's Office launched an investigation into possible violation of the city's campaign finance law, no formal action was taken.

Parks said if the city is so interested in ensuring everyone is on a level playing field perhaps it should look into regulating the advantage incumbents have over newcomers.

Councilman Dan Del Campo, who ran twice on slates, questioned Seller's proposed approach to regulate the teams, saying each candidate already must report contributions and expenditures under the Fair Political Practices Commission's rules.

``I don't see it as having any real advantage,'' said Del Campo. ``I think we got an exercise in futility in trying to regulate what amounts to freedom of speech. It's a First Amendment issue as far as I am concerned.''

Sellers in his report said his staff could not find a city or court case that held slate and independent candidates to separate limits on contributions and expenditures.

He said legal experts in campaign matters expressed concerns about a city's ability to discriminate against slates with different fund-raising or expenditure levels.

``Amending the city's ordinance to in any way prohibit the sharing of an expenditure falls into an area that the court has indicated treads on constitutionally protected rights of political free speech and association,'' Sellers wrote.

Sellers said if the council decides to pursue his alternative, he would return with a proposed ordinance.

``It's just to make more disclosures of something,'' he said. ``It's not to prohibit anything they do but have the public more aware.

``I think the real concern for the council was the real inequity of purchasing power for slates vs. independent candidates.''