<p>According to <a href="http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/inside-the-mayors-nonp…; target="”_blank”">an article yesterday on the Voice of San Diego website</a>, yet another mayoral pet charity has been created in San Diego, called <a href="http://www.1sandiego.org/" target="”_blank”">One San Diego</a>. The article by Liam Dillon notes that, although the mayor and his wife have no official or financial relationship with the charity, they are very closely involved, to the point where a contribution to One San Diego is effectively a contribution to the mayor, who will likely be running for re-election next year. Not only are there no limits on such contributions, but there is also no disclosure.<br />
<br />
The most troubling words in the article are those of the nonprofit's president, a former council president and ally of the mayor: “We’re going to just focus on abiding by the letter of the law.” What he means is that, although the nonprofit could disclose all of its contributions, since by law it does not have to, it won't (however, any contributions the mayor personally solicits must be disclosed). This sends the message that the nonprofit has something to hide, which implies that it is being used for pay to play.<br />
<br />
The mayor ties himself to One San Diego in press releases and in the nonprofit's focus on the same areas of the city he is focusing on. And his wife has presented One San Diego checks the same way she might present a city check to a city project. In fact, the mayor’s political fundraiser is also One San Diego’s fundraiser.<br />
<br />
In addition, the name of the nonprofit is a phrase that the mayor "has been pushing since he was elected in February 2014. The phrase appears in his official biography. His staff has included the phrase in 57 different official press releases over the past year." The nonprofit was founded in November 2014.<br />
<br />
What differentiates One San Diego from classic pet charities is that there is no mayoral golf tournament and that it is not a general charity, but one that follows the mayor's priorities.<br />
<br />
New York City's mayor has done the same thing. But this is not something that should become fashionable. It might seem that the mayor is going above and beyond the call of duty in pushing a city charity to do work the city cannot afford. But charities should not be politically involved, and they should not be, or be reasonably seen as, a vehicle for pay to play or campaign support, or as a way to get around campaign finance limitations or give the mayor extra publicity.<br />
<br />
For more on mayoral pet charities, see the following blog posts:<br />
<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/problems-mayoral-booster-organization…; target="”_blank”">The Problems with a Mayoral Booster Organization</a><br />
<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/two-interesting-twists-old-gift-offic…; target="”_blank”">Two Interesting Twists on the Old Gift to an Official's Pet Charity Gambit</a><br />
<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/536" target="”_blank”">A New Twist on Charity Abuse by Politicians</a><br />
<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/239" target="”_blank”">Charitable Fundraising as an End Run Around Ethics Laws</a><br />
<br />
Robert Wechsler<br />
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br />
<br />
---</p>