Two incumbent city councillors raised thousands more than their spending limit and spent the bulk of it on voting day parties and volunteer appreciation, show new expense claims for the October municipal election.
Coun. Tom Jackson, who has represented Ward 6 since 1988, and Coun. Lloyd Ferguson of Ward 13 in Ancaster both raised more than their spending limits and spent thousands rewarding their volunteers.
Jackson's spending limit was $29,078.80. He fundraised $63,580 and spent $63,130.32. But $24,172.29 of that wasn't spent on getting elected, but rather on an election day "voting day party/appreciation notices."
Ferguson had a spending limit of $25,802.05 and raised $36,798.50. He spent $36,072.46, and in his case, $12,129.74 of it was spent on "voting day party/appreciation notices."
'I don't need to. This is not public money. It's money I spent for my campaign.'- Coun. Lloyd Ferguson
By comparison, Mayor Fred Eisenberger, who spent $106,647 of his $318,000 limit, spent $646 on volunteer appreciation.
Campaign expenses fall into two categories: those subject to the spending limit and those not subject to the limit. Both spent within the limit in the first category. Volunteer appreciation and fundraising costs fall into the second category.
Both of them won their elections handily — Jackson with 80.83 per cent of the vote, Ferguson with 78.75 per cent.
Jackson couldn't be reached for comment on Friday.
His election competitor, Dan Rodrigues, spent about $3,000 and got 11.53 per cent of the vote. Rodrigues said he was "floored" by the amount Jackson raised.
"I'd like to look into it," he said.
None of the candidates' expense claims include a detailed accounting of how they spent the volunteer appreciation money. Jackson's details a $10,000.77 fundraising party, including the cost of a DJ and table decorations, but gives no detail on the $24,172.29 expense.
Ferguson said he spent it on volunteer appreciation, but wouldn't elaborate.
"I don't need to," he said. "This is not public money. It's money I spent for my campaign. I'm grateful for the support I got. I'm equally grateful for my volunteers."
Ferguson said his campaign's chief financial officer "made sure I followed 100 per cent by the rules." He also didn't solicit donations, he said.
'It's the only law I can think of where citizens are the overseers.'- Don McLean, CATCH
It's not the first time Jackson has spent thousands thanking his volunteers. In 2006, he had $43,931.35 in campaign expenses, $13,394.46 of which was spent on a voting day party and volunteer appreciation.
But members of the public who want to know more have to dig into such matters themselves. City staff doesn't scrutinize the statements, said Tony Fallis, Hamilton's chief returning officer. The provincial Municipal Elections Act relies on the public to raise red flags.
People have to appeal to a city compliance audit committee, Fallis said.
'A brief look at them'
"The public would scrutinize them," he said of expense reports.
"We're not auditors or accountants, even though I'll take a brief look at them when they come in."
In the past, citizens have had to take cases to court, and if they lose, risk having to pay candidate's legal costs too, said Don McLean of Citizens At City Hall (CATCH), a city hall watch dog.
"It puts you in a position of potentially being exposed to liability," he said.
"There's no oversight from anybody, basically. It's citizen oversight. It's a very strange law. It's the only law I can think of where citizens are the overseers."
Citizens have challenged election spending before. In 2004, Joanna Chapman of Dundas questioned a contribution Losani Homes made to Larry Di Ianni's mayoral campaign. Chapman spent thousands in a process that led Di Ianni pleading guilty to six counts of violating the Municipal Elections Act.
Coun. Lloyd Ferguson wouldn't elaborate on how he spent the money allocated for a "voting day party/appreciation notices," but says it's "100 per cent by the rules." (Samantha Craggs/CBC)
Not much farther to run for mayor
McLean wonders why a long-time incumbent such as Jackson raises so much.
"If you raise $64,000 running for a ward seat where there's no real threat of you losing, you don't have to raise very much more to run for mayor," he said.
"Why raise all of that money if you're not going to actually need it for your campaign?"
The large amount raised by Jackson and other incumbents adds to their already large advantage over their challengers, said Marvin Ryder, a McMaster University assistant professor of marketing. But governments have struggled for decades with how to fix it.
Fundraising comes easily to incumbents, Ryder said, because people want to give money to winning candidates.
Not just incumbents
"I am surprised that Tom felt the necessity to spend that kind of money on a campaign," Ryder said. "But I'm not surprised that they have a fairly easy time raising money.
"If you have the ability to raise more money and put it in a place where it's not as regulated, then they can use that extra on largesse for their campaign workers."
It's not just incumbents who spent more than the limit and put a large amount into voter appreciation. In Ward 3, 15 competitors had a spending limit of $25,429.06 each. Winning candidate Matthew Green raised $28,534.51 and spent $31,380.20. He spent $2,382.50 on fundraising and $2,083.61 on a voting day party/volunteer appreciation. Nearly all of his money was fundraised.
Bob Assadourian, another Ward 3 candidate, raised $24,670 and spent $26,412.29. Of that, $22,095 was his own money.
