Just because it's not "legally" wrong does not make an action ethically correct or even correct in the eyes of the public. Thus the story about a vice mayor who used his position to solicit $ for his nonprofit. Of course this effort is also a fine line between coercive action and quid-pro-quo action and, well, you name it. Pretty much, this is unsavory behavior. And this type of transaction even has a name: behested giving.
From the San Diego Union Tribune:
La Mesa vice mayor, now running for state Assembly, solicited $700,000 in donations to his own nonprofit
Colin Parent, who is CEO of Circulate San Diego, says there is nothing untoward about the payments.
Last month, La Mesa Vice Mayor Colin Parent signed a public disclosure acknowledging he solicited a $5,500 donation from a major developer to Circulate San Diego, the charity for which he serves as chief executive officer.
It was the 68th time in the last five years that Parent reported seeking cash contributions to his employer, according to records released by the La Mesa City Clerk’s Office at the request of The San Diego Union-Tribune.
Since April 2018, the La Mesa Democrat has disclosed almost $700,000 in what are called behested payments — donations to charities by companies and individuals that are made at the suggestion, or behest, of an elected or appointed official. All of the contributions were directed to Circulate San Diego, which Parent has run for years.
The second-term council member, who announced last month that he is running for state Assembly, said there is nothing unusual about steering donations to his employer.
But political experts and good-government groups say the behested payments are questionable. For Parent as an elected official to ask donors for money to support an organization that he also manages raises the specter of conflicts of interest, they said.
“Even if everything is legal, the public perception is horrible,” said Sean McMorris of California Common Cause, a nonprofit group that promotes government transparency.
“As an elected official, when you’re involved in this kind of activity, where money is exchanged at an elected official’s request, the public has every right to question whether a public official’s loyalty is with that donor or with the public,” McMorris said of the solicited donations.
Unlike in larger cities such as San Diego, La Mesa council members serve only part-time. Oftentimes, elected officials from smaller cities also hold full-time jobs.
Parent collected about $30,000 in pay and benefits for his La Mesa City Council service in 2021, according to a public database maintained by Transparent California.
His day job as the Circulate San Diego CEO is more lucrative. The organization’s latest federal tax filing shows Parent was paid $141,000 in 2021, or about 14 percent of its annual revenue.
Parent, who is also a lawyer and has been a member of the state bar for 15 years, said he complies with all laws governing charitable contributions and public disclosures.
“California does require that donations that elected officials help solicit to a nonprofit be disclosed to the public through a behested form,” he said. “I carefully follow those requirements and file all the necessary behested forms.”
Circulate San Diego is a nonprofit that advocates for public transportation and what it calls sustainable growth. But it also, according to its website, operates as a “fee-for-service planning team” for public and private clients. It also develops public policy and advocates in favor of development projects that meet its standards for “smart growth.”
The La Mesa vice mayor says he has recused himself from voting on any issues that present direct conflicts between his work and fundraising for Circulate San Diego and his public service as an elected official.
Parent singled out his decision to abstain from voting on a partnership between the city and the San Diego Foundation to develop the Livable La Mesa plan, which was produced in 2019 by the city, the foundation, Circulate San Diego and other organizations.
Two years later, the San Diego Foundation gave Circulate San Diego a $50,000 donation.
Parent also said he avoids casting ballots on issues that affect people who work for him at the nonprofit.
“On several occasions, I have had employees at Circulate apply for appointments to boards and commissions in La Mesa,” he said. “I recused myself from any such decisions.”
But Parent has voted on matters that affect donors to the charity he runs.
Records show he voted in favor of granting San Diego Gas & Electric permission to develop a charging station for electric cars at MacArthur Park in 2021. The utility is the largest single donor to Circulate San Diego, contributing more than $180,000 over the past five years.
Parent also voted for a proposed city law governing electric scooters in 2019. State disclosures show he solicited at least $22,500 in donations from e-scooter operators like Bird and Lyft to his employer.
The vice mayor said he raised the issue of donations to Circulate San Diego with the California Fair Political Practices Commission, or FPPC, which enforces state campaign and fundraising rules.
He said he was told such scenarios are permitted.
“In California, donations to nonprofit employers of elected officials are not treated as income to those officials and do not trigger obligations for recusal,” Parent said.
Apparent violations
According to the FPPC, payments are considered “behested” if they are made at the request or solicitation of an elected official or with their cooperation.
Payments of $5,000 or more in a single calendar year are required to be publicly disclosed within 30 days.
Parent appears to have violated the 30-day reporting window dozens of times. His filings show 34 payments were disclosed after the reporting period elapsed.
In response, Parent said he is not always alerted to contributions to Circulate San Diego.
“Occasionally, internal processes at Circulate have not immediately flagged for me donations that required behested payments,” he said.
“Nevertheless, as soon as I became aware of donations to Circulate that required the filing of behested payment forms, those forms were immediately filed with the La Mesa City Clerk.”
The La Mesa councilman is not alone in seeking donations to favored causes. Behested payments in recent years have become a key fundraising device for elected officials across state and local governments.
Gov. Gavin Newsom reported more than $3 million in behested payments in 2018, his first year in the Governor’s Office. Since then, the amount of charitable contributions solicited by Newsom has totaled nearly $300 million, state records show.
Former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer disclosed more than $4.5 million in behested payments during his administration, the Union-Tribune reported in 2020.
More than $1.5 million was directed to One San Diego, the tax-exempt entity that famously distributed backpacks and other school supplies to needy families but also provided resources to Faulconer.
“Through its work, One San Diego seeks to support the organization of the Mayor’s Office,” the charity’s mission statement said.
One San Diego dissolved weeks after Faulconer left city hall.
Former District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis solicited $50,000 in charitable contributions to an organization whose tax-exempt status was revoked by the Internal Revenue Service and that had never even registered with the state of California, the Union-Tribune reported in 2017.
The program manager for the charity, called Village of Promise Health Outreach, said the revocation and lack of state registration were due to oversights that she would correct. The organization’s then-volunteer manager was a retired District Attorney’s Office administrator.
Former Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez solicited tens of thousands of dollars in 2016 for the Three Wise Men Foundation, a charity formed by her then-boyfriend Nathan Fletcher.
The couple was married in 2017, and Fletcher was elected to the county Board of Supervisors the following year. He was re-elected in November but announced he would resign last month after being named in a civil lawsuit accusing him of sexual assault and harassment.
In Parent’s case, SDG&E has been the largest source of solicited donations to Circulate San Diego.
Rep. Scott Peters also has given at least $50,000 to the organization over the past five years — $10,000 at a time, state records show.
A top aide to the San Diego congressman said the donations came from personal funds and were made because Peters helped found the charity years ago.
Chief of Staff MaryAnne Pintar said the behested payments disclosed by Parent are wholly appropriate.
“Soliciting funds for the nonprofit he runs is part of the job, as it would be for anyone who runs a nonprofit,” she said. “So long as he is following all applicable disclosure and transparency rules, it is fine.”
Parent has also reported significant awards from developers like Sea Breeze Properties, Baldwin & Sons and Sudberry Properties, which Parent said gave $5,500 on April 10.
“I am very careful to avoid any decision as a public official that will have an impact on my employer Circulate San Diego, or any other source of income to me,” the La Mesa council member said.
Parent said the money he raises for Circulate San Diego does not directly affect the salary he collects from the nonprofit entity.
“Circulate San Diego is governed by an independent volunteer board of directors, which determines my compensation for the upcoming year on an annual basis,” he said.
‘Recognition and support’
Records show the charity dates back at least 2005, when the tax-exempt organization was called Walk San Diego. Its mission was to promote safe walking in neighborhoods generally vulnerable for pedestrians.
Walk San Diego merged with another local nonprofit called Move San Diego in 2014 to create what’s now called Circulate San Diego.
In addition to promoting safe transportation opportunities such as walking, biking and public transit, Circulate San Diego publishes policy papers and holds community education events.
It also markets “mobility certifications” to local developers at up to $15,000 each, and it helps them secure building permits through public testimony by Circulate San Diego staff before elected officials about the benefits of a particular project.
“The Circulate Mobility Certification provides recognition and support for transit-oriented, smart-growth projects in the San Diego region,” the Circulate San Diego website says.
A certification comes with a letter from the charity that a developer can present to elected officials considering a building permit and with permission to use the Circulate San Diego seal of approval on public communications.
Circulate San Diego staff also will agree to testify at public meetings on behalf of an applicant who received a mobility certification, the charity says.
“Additional services for certified projects can also be negotiated,” the website notes.
The public-policy and planning nonprofit stopped evaluating development projects in La Mesa for potential mobility certification after Parent joined the City Council, he said.
“Circulate adopted this practice to ensure there was no appearance of conflict between my role at Circulate and my role on the La Mesa City Council,” he said.
The organization does certify building plans in the city of San Diego, Parent said, adding that it follows that city’s ethics rules when it does.
He said the support that Circulate San Diego provides donors through certifications, seals and public testimony does not equate to lobbying because it is all done publicly.
“Circulate will only advocate on behalf of projects to decision makers in ‘noticed public meetings or hearings,’” he said. “Those types of communications are not treated as lobbying by the city of San Diego’s ethics code.”
While the Circulate San Diego mission has expanded notably since it first incorporated as Walk San Diego, so have its profile, revenue and political influence.
Eighteen years ago, Walk San Diego reported just $92,000 in annual revenue — almost all of it from grants and community donations.
In 2021, Circulate San Diego reported more than $1 million in revenue, with three out of every four dollars coming from program services like the paid certifications.
Clint Daniels, the Circulate San Diego board chair, said the organization’s success shows that its expanded mission resonates with clients, contributors and community leaders.
“We advocate for better policy choices when it comes to smart growth, biking and pedestrian safety,” he said. “Those are things that our donors, by giving us money, believe in as well.”
Daniels said he sees no conflict between Parent’s behested payments and his position as CEO.
“That (disclosure) is what the state requires him to do,” he said. “I don’t know that there’s anything untoward there; it’s just what the state requires him to do.”
But others disagree. Among them is Carl Luna, the University of San Diego political science professor who also directs the Institute for Civil Civic Engagement.
Luna called behested payments part of a “wink-wink, nod-nod culture” in which politicians and donors pretend the money isn’t donated for political benefit.
He said they should be more strictly regulated to protect the democratic process from undue influence.
“Behests are a legal loophole, but they muddy the ethical waters,” Luna said. “That’s why I believe all such ‘behest’ payments should only be blind, such that the elected official is never informed how much is contributed and by whom.”
Parent announced last month that he was running for the state Assembly seat now held by Dr. Akilah Weber, his former colleague on the La Mesa City Council.
Weber was promoted to the statehouse in a special 2021 election and now plans to run for the seat being vacated by Sen. Toni Atkins.