Orange County DA-elect Todd Spitzer used $189K in taxpayer funds on mailers during campaign, prompting allegations of misuse

Orange County Supervisor Todd Spitzer issued $189,000 worth of mailings from his office during his recent bid to become District Attorney, spurring allegations that he misused taxpayer money for political gain.

From March through August, Spitzer’s office mailed out more than 768,000 fliers to constituents in the county’s 3rd District, after sending no such mailings during his previous five years in office, according to public records obtained by the Orange County Register.

The mailings – which promoted county-sponsored town halls featuring Spitzer and a summer concert series – appear to have been legal. But critics say such communications, particularly when sent in high volume during election years, offer a way for public officials to campaign with taxpayer funds.

Spitzer’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Bob Stern, a government ethics expert and co-author of California’s 1974 Political Reform Act, said Spitzer’s mailers appear to have “taken advantage of the law” to boost the supervisor’s name recognition, giving him a taxpayer-funded advantage.

“He’s sort of thumbing his nose at the law and saying, ‘I’m going to play games with this,’” Stern said of Spitzer’s mailers. “What he’s doing is legal but it’s not ethical.”

Orange County political watchdog Shirley Grindle – a Spitzer supporter – agreed with Stern.

“I’m pleased that Spitzer won the race, but that doesn’t mean that I approve of his campaign tactics,” Grindle said. “It’s unethical.”

Spitzer defeated his longtime political nemesis, District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, by 6.6 percentage points in an expensive contest. Spitzer’s campaign spent nearly $2.8 million this year, with about half going to TV ads and a quarter toward campaign mailers independent of the fliers sent by his government office. Rackauckas spent $1 million but also was backed by $372,000 in outside spending from the county’s sheriff deputies’ union.

Orange County has a unique history when it comes to public officials using taxpayer-funded communications to benefit their campaigns. Stern called the county “ground zero for this sort of thing,” saying he hasn’t heard of public mailers being used to such a high degree by local officials anywhere else in California.

In 2017, the state legislature imposed restrictions on the use of mass-mailings. The law was written after Orange County Supervisor Andrew Do used $277,000 in tax money on fliers prior to the 2016 election. Do issued 1.2 million pieces of mail and won the election by 648 votes.

The state law prohibits elected officials from sending publicly funded mailers during the 60 days prior to an election in which their name is on the ballot. Spitzer sent his mailers mostly in the weeks immediately prior to the new deadlines.

During a six-week window starting in late February, four Orange County supervisors running for public office cumulatively sent out $241,000 worth of tax-financed mass-mailers to constituents. That slew included one mailer from Supervisor Michelle Steel promoting an event co-hosted by Rackauckas. At the time, Spitzer was one of Steel’s harshest critics regarding her mailers, calling Steel’s efforts “campaign mail 101.” The board eventually passed minimal restrictions on how the communications can be used.

Orange County supervisors began sending mailers in volume in 2015 after the board passed new rules for the promotion of community events. Following the recent allegations that supervisors have misused or abused the program, Stern called this week for the state legislature to further restrict when mass mailings can be sent, calling for a full year blackout

When Spitzer becomes district attorney in early January, he will pull a substantially higher salary. As a supervisor, Spitzer’s total compensation last year was $233,000, including benefits. In his new job, he’ll make somewhere in the range of $320,000 annually.