Why some Hamilton candidates shun campaign contributions from developers

When Kojo Damptey announced his run for municipal office, he made it clear his campaign wouldn't accept donations from developers.

I'm not antidevelopment. We have to provide housing," the Ward 14 candidate told The Spectator.

But city politicians shouldn't become beholden" to developers angling for their favour on land-use decisions, Damptey said.

As a councillor, if I'm elected, my first duty is to represent the residents," said the aspiring west Mountain candidate.

Other Hamilton candidates are similarly eschewing developer-connected contributions in the run-up to the Oct. 24 election.

The optics" of pocketing those cheques are very problematic," said Lynda Lukasik, who's running in Ward 5.

I hope I can run a campaign with community grassroots support," said Lukasik, who has dialed back her duties leading Environment Hamilton to vie for the east end-Stoney Creek seat.

Municipal councils carry the weighty responsibility of shaping their communities through land-use policy and planning decisions.

Approving or rejecting development applications can affect everything from neighbourhood building heights to parking and stormwater runoff.

Moreover, as Hamilton grows - 236,000 more residents are expected by 2051 - city politicians must also consider overarching issues: urban sprawl, neighbourhood density, housing affordability, lagging infrastructure.

Developers, meanwhile, navigate the local process, which has been bogged down with delays amid an uptick in building activity, sparking appeals to the Ontario Land Tribunal.

The industry has also tried to bring its influence to bear on the size of Hamilton's urban area. Builders who own rural parcels lobbied council last year - to no avail - for a residential expansion.

Provincial rules for campaign contributions have changed in recent years. In 2016, the provincial government outlawed donations from corporations and labour unions in an effort to level the playing field for candidates.

However, developers or union officials as individuals can still donate up to $1,200 per campaign, with a limit of $5,000 per jurisdiction, like anyone else.

Development-sector contributions - whether through directly connected executives or family members - still predominate certain local campaigns as in years past, Don McLean says.

The legislative change didn't change things a whole lot," observed McLean, a longtime environmental activist who has examined candidates' public filings since the 1990s, because the same names turn up."

Councillors have said $1,200 won't buy me," he noted, but the people who are giving them the money appear to be doing that for purposes achieving influence in some way or another."

For context, in the 2018 election, Mayor Fred Eisenberger spent $114,534 on his campaign. The spending limit for that year's mayoral race was $318,705.40.

Council candidates have lower spending limits - between roughly $20,000 and $30,000 - depending on how many eligible voters are in wards.

McLean figures he, too, is buying influence on some level" by donating to campaigns, but says for him, there's no financial interest in doing so.

I'm not in the business of getting something from council that will fill my pockets at some point."

Cameron Kroetsch, who's taking a second crack at Ward 2, says he doesn't want to be part of such a relationship with developers.

He considers it a conflict of interest given that planning decisions occupy considerable bandwidth in a councillor's range of responsibilities.

I don't think it's ethical, or responsible for me to take money from them when I need to make decisions that impact their bottom line."

Kroetsch said developers offered him money during his 2018 campaign in the downtown-and-area ward. And I've given it back. You just have to do it."

For his part, Craig Cassar hopes to become Ancaster's next councillor, also without accepting developer dollars.

Pocketing them isn't a good look, especially with the backdrop of a formidable local movement to halt reckless development" sprawl into farmland.

Developers are part of the community, said the first-time Ward 12 candidate, but we want to represent the greater good and not just development corporations."

Coun. Lloyd Ferguson, Ancaster's longtime representative, had several developer contributors during his 2018 campaign, including Darko Vranich, Frank Spallacci and Paul Valeri. Planning consultants Sergio Manchia and Matt Johnston of Urban Solutions were also in the mix.

But Ferguson, who's retiring from politics at the end of this term, says those industry-connected donations had no influence on him when it came to planning decisions, noting he has opposed the plans of at least two supporters.

I can't be bought for $1,200."

Like other incumbents, Coun. Maria Pearson also drew several developer donors for her 2018 reelection campaign in Ward 10 with such backers as Aldo DeSantis, Fred Losani and Jeff Paikin.

But Pearson - who emphasized she doesn't solicit donations - also said she hasn't felt pressured to favour contributors' applications in lower Stoney Creek, which is brimming with residential construction.

Do I feel when I'm sitting at the table that I'm compromised because it's A, B and C's development ...? Absolutely not, and they know that."

So says Paikin, president of New Horizon Development Group, explaining he doesn't expect his campaign boosts to translate into a quid pro quo at the council table.

I think it's pretty clear that people will support candidates - no matter who is doing the supporting - that have like-minded philosophies," he said. But that doesn't mean that you would anticipate that everything that you bring forward is going to get a yes because of a small stipend of support for a campaign."

Paikin contributed $1,200 to Pearson's 2018 campaign. New Horizon, meanwhile, is challenging the city at the Ontario Land Tribunal over a plan for residential towers near the Lake Ontario shore in her ward.

Other developers The Spectator contacted for this story didn't respond to queries or declined to comment.

It's difficult to measure the political upshot of the industry's contributions, says Zachary Spicer, a York University political scientist who has studied campaign finances.

But Spicer argues the $1,200 cap on individual donations doesn't offer much political capital to sway council votes, especially on contentious decisions.

If you're a politician, you're not going to do something that is publicly unpopular because somebody gave you 500 bucks. It's very hard to be beholden to someone for such a low dollar value."

Spicer - a member of the city's election compliance audit committee - contends there are more effective levers of influence, including lunch meetings to push projects or volunteering for campaigns.

He also points out candidates who reject developers' money aren't typically selected to receive their largesse in the first place, calling the public stance somewhat performative."

Lukasik, for one, noted with a chuckle that she wasn't exactly a development-industry favourite during her run for local office in the late 1990s.

I did have one (offer) but I very graciously said, No, thank you.'"

Kroetsch, meanwhile, begs to differ that the $1,200 cap doesn't allow for much sway. It's significant percentage wise" considering overall spending in council races. In 2018, Ward 2 candidates were limited to $21,878.45, for instance.

Besides, Kroetsch observed, repeated donations from contributors to councillors can add up over elections.

So it may seem like a trickle now, but later on, with the accumulation, it's a lot."

Teviah Moro is a reporter at The Spectator. tmoro@thespec.com