CAPITOLA — Greenway Capitola, a driving force behind Measure L and outspoken opponent of efforts to expand rail services in Santa Cruz County, is facing an investigation by state elections officials for inconsistencies with campaign financial filings.
In a Nov. 6 letter, the California Fair Political Practices Committee told the organization it is being investigated for several allegations, but stopped short of stating whether those allegations are valid.
Approved by voters in the Nov. 6 election, Measure L was created to bolster the bicycle and pedestrian trail throughout the county by requiring the City of Capitola to pursue non-rail options for its iconic trestle bridge. The new law also prohibits the city from creating a bike and pedestrian detour through its streets and sidewalks. Just over 52 percent of voters approved the measure.
The investigation is a response to an Oct. 29 complaint filed by the “Capitola First – No on L” committee.
According to the FPPC, Greenway Capitola initially listed itself as a General Purpose City Committee, instead of a Primarily Formed Committee, which has a stricter set of rules governing the financial information they must disclose.
“By not changing its committee status as required by state law, the committee avoided required 24-hour contribution disclosures; violated state law by listing campaign expenditures as independent
expenditures; violated state law by not including accrued and non-monetary expenditures in its reporting; and otherwise tried to mislead the City and the voting public,” the letter read.
In addition, Greenway incorrectly listed $5,381 of “Yes on Measure L” expenditures as independent expenditures.
The committee also failed to list “presumably substantive” legal fees it received when the City of Capitola unsuccessfully challenged the proposed measure, the letter said.
The FPPC also accused Greenway Capitola of not listing the help it received from Santa Cruz County Greenway — which included providing numerous paid staff for door-to-door campaign activities, and providing signs and literature — as “non-monetary contributions.”
Perhaps the most damning allegation in the letter was the assertion that Capitola City Clerk Linda Fridy repeatedly warned Greenway about the possible violations.
“Given the warnings issued by the City Clerk, it’s doubtful that these violations of FPPC law were unintentional,” the letter said. “The 460s indicate no accrued expenses or non-monetary contributions.”
Santa Cruz County Greenway Executive Director Manu Koenig provided a response letter from Capitola Greenway, which stated, “It is unfortunate that the No on L Campaign, which lost a fair election in Capitola, cannot graciously accept the will of the voters, and has now resorted to making false statements about
the Yes on L campaign.”
“The Yes on L campaign is aware of its campaign reporting obligations and has disclosed, and will continue to disclose, all receipts and expenditures as required by law,” the letter continued.
If the violations are found to be true, state regulators can send a warning letter or impose fines of up to $5,000 per violation. They can also pursue criminal charges, if the allegations warrant them.
•••
Other legal issues
Meanwhile, Greenway will be in court on Friday to defend a lawsuit it filed in July against the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. In the lawsuit, Greenway accuses the commission of not complying with the California Environmental Quality Act when it approved an agreement with Progressive Rail.
The RTC on June 14 approved a 10-year contract with Minnesota-based Progressive Rail to operate its Santa Cruz Branch Railroad line, a 31-mile stretch that runs from Watsonville to Davenport.
That company might also run a passenger service along the line.
The lawsuit alleges that the RTC entered the agreement without first evaluating the environmental impacts.
