The Richest Mayors in Rhode Island
Saturday, November 05, 2011
Two Rhode Island Mayors are sitting pretty on more than $100,000 in campaign cash while the majority have less than $35,000 in their accounts, according to a GoLocalProv review of campaign finance reports.
All local elected officials and candidates had to file their most recent reports (third quarter) this past Monday and after combing through the results of the heads of each city and town, Johnston Mayor Joseph Polisena tops the list with over $106,000 in his campaign account while Cranston Mayor Allan Fung is right behind him with just over $102,000.
The majority of cities and towns in Rhode Island do not elect a Mayor; generally an at-large member of the City/Town Council serves in the role or the Council appoints a Chief Executive Officer. GoLocalProv only reviewed those leaders who have actually filed campaign finance reports.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTTwo Year Terms Force Quicker Turnaround
Only three cities and towns (Providence, North Providence and Central Falls) have elected Mayors serving four-year terms while the leadership in Cranston, Cumberland, Johnston, Pawtucket, Warwick and Woonsocket are forced to run for re-election every two years.
In Providence, Mayor Angel Taveras reported just $3058.99 in his third quarter campaign finance filing, but the Capital City’s new Mayor won’t face re-election until 2014. Taveras also outspends every Mayor in the state and has the ability to raise money in a hurry. But in a city like Pawtucket, for example, Mayor Don Grebien has an entirely different situation. He was elected along with Taveras last year, but he had to begin his re-election fundraising right away because of the two-year term.
“On the question of fundraising, the two-year term typically puts more immediate pressure on incumbents to start raising money the day after they get sworn in, but strategic incumbents in both two and four year positions (some states have two-year governships) use early fundraising to shore up their own base and scare away challengers,” Brown Political Science Professor Wendy Schiller said.
Schiller said studies have shown that early success in fundraising for incumbents serves as a signaling device that convinces contributors that the incumbent is a worthy candidate and it discourages challengers because they have a harder time making the argument that they will be able to defeat the incumbent. However, she said it would be interesting to see what would happen if elected officials weren’t allowed to fundraise in their first year in office.
“It would be very useful to be able to test the theory by barring incumbents from raising money in the first year of their tenure,” Schiller said. “At least then contributors would have a record to base their decision on and it would reduce the early fundraising advantage for incumbents versus challengers.”
Pollster: Predicting Election Costs Always a Challenge
Fung, Warwick Mayor Scott Avedisian and Cumberland Mayor Daniel McKee are all believed to have statewide aspirations and their campaign accounts reflect their ambition. Each Mayor reported balances exceeding $30,000 following the third quarter. Still, all three would have to raise much more to be viable for a general office.
According to Quest Research pollster Victor Profughi, predicating election costs is always a challenge. He said so much depends upon what type of opposition there might be and whether there is a credible in the primary, general election, or both.
However, Profughi noted that those serving four years seem to spend just as much time raising campaign funds as the two year-term mayors, even if the pressure isn’t as immense. He used Congress as the clear example.
“Longer terms don't really seem to be much of a factor in reducing the amount of time candidates spend in fundraising, and certainly don't appear to significantly cut down on the amount of total money raised for the campaign,” he said. “The six year term for Senators (vs. two year terms for members of the House) simply seems to give senators a longer stretch to raise their money, but I'm not sure there is any evidence that the longer term means they do more ‘actual work.’”
Pawtucket Mayor: Clock is Always Ticking
For Grebien in Pawtucket, the pressure is always on to keep raising money. Grebien said his city charter restricts him to a two-year term, but he said no office holder who wishes to be re-elected can ignore the need to raise the funds required to bring his or her message to the public and get their supporters to the polls on Election Day.
“It is an unfortunate fact of life today that running for political office can be a costly process, so no matter what the length of term is for an incumbent, that clock is always ticking,” Grebien said.
Grebien said the reality is that it takes money to gain and retain office, so he works to hold periodic events to avoid the major distraction of raising funds in a way that might interfere with his job. He admitted to disliking having to raise campaign money.
“Raising campaign funds is one of the least favorite of my tasks that come with holding public office,” Grebien said. “I am much more at home working every day to help constituents, attending community events and trying hard to improve the fiscal well-being and quality of life in the city. It’s a lot more enjoyable, and productive for our citizens, to be meeting with others who share those goals and want to improve Pawtucket’s future than dealing with the necessity of raising campaign funds.”
Common Cause: May be Time to Consider Four-Year Terms
Unlike state lawmakers, leaders in cities and towns are on the clock year-round, making it difficult for governing and fundraising not to mix. Common Cause Executive Director John Marion, who has advocated for General Assembly members to restrict their fundraising until the session is over, said “it would certainly be nice if there were ‘quiet periods’ in fundraising for those in executive positions.“
But he noted that the options are somewhat limited. He said moving to a four-year term might be the right step, particularly for some of the large cities in the state.
“We supported (way back when) the move from two to four-year terms for the general officers,” Marion said. “I think everyone agrees that has been a great success for Rhode Island. Perhaps it's time to consider that in places like Cranston where being the mayor takes so much attention having such frequent elections is overly-burdensome. We do not have a stated position on that, but it's certainly a reasonable argument.”
Short Honeymoons
As it stands now, the intense focus on fundraising is a part of the political process that simply isn’t going away. Darrell West, Vice President and Director of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution in Washington D.C., said he too believes two-year terms can be difficult for local leaders.
It is hard for mayors to get much done during a two-year term because you are up for re-election almost as soon as you start your term,” West said. “You need to focus on fundraising and building a campaign staff, and this can be distracting from time spent governing.”
West said the two-year terms give critics the ability to attack sooner.
“Two-year terms lead to short honeymoons because political critics focus right away on what mayors are doing poorly because the election is not very far away,” he said.
If you valued this article, please LIKE GoLocalProv.com on Facebook by clicking HERE.
