The Money Rolls in for Mayor and Council Races

Several candidates have raised big bucks in their races (much of it from the usual political suspects); also, a recap of the Campbell Theater candidates forum; and a shameful Facebook post

It’s the homestretch of Election 2022, and the only things the mayoral candidates have made crystal clear to voters about Martinez are 1) it is either a crime-ridden city or one of the safest places in California; and 2) it is one of the best-run cities around or one of the worst. Whether in Martinez or Washington, D.C., politics is always in the eyes of the beholder. Welcome Back to the Newsletter.

The City Clerk’s Office shared a huge batch of campaign finance filings with me last week in response to my public records request, and some of the numbers were eye-popping. For a relatively small city, I was surprised to see how much money is being raised and spent by some candidates (and how much they’re also lending to their own campaigns in some cases). I’m also a bit concerned about how much of it is coming from special, organized and other entrenched interests, raising questions in my mind about whether this election will truly mark a new chapter in city politics that focuses as much on the marginalized and underrepresented as it always has on the well-connected, or more of the same (a city largely run by the privileged and well-connected for the interests of the privileged and well-connected).

But enough commentary. I’ll let you make your own decisions based on the numbers I’ve collected for the individual candidates, starting with the mayor’s race. And here’s the link to all the documents I received if you’d like to review them yourself.

Note: I did my best to doublecheck the numbers and report everything accurately and completely here, but please keep in mind that I had 273 pages of filings to sort through and I’m doing this project in my spare time (evenings and weekends) without any editing/proofreading backup. If I misstated or missed anything, please let me know ASAP so that I can correct, and accept my apologies. Also, the City Council moved last week to implement an online campaign finance filing system/portal that should be accessible to the public for the 2024 election to review filings without having to request them from the city clerk, something I’ve been pushing the city to do for the past two years. Too bad it didn’t happen in time for this year’s pivotal election but better late than never.

MAYOR

Michael Ayers

Following his under-the-radar trend of not filing an official ballot statement and not attending the recent candidates forum, there’s no record I found of Ayers reporting any campaign contributions. But the money for all those signs must be coming from somewhere? (Campaigns don’t have to report their contributions if the total raised in a calendar year is under $2,000.)

Lara DeLaney

The longtime councilwoman reported receiving $12,090 in monetary contributions, plus $9,334.72 in nonmonetary contributions, for the filing period from July 1 to Sept. 24 (to her credit, she’s funding her campaign overwhelmingly through individual contributions as opposed to special interest money/PAC money). That included $2,000 she contributed to her own campaign. Her biggest individual contribution was $4,473.13 from Dick Duncan that came in the form of yard signs. She also reported $1,000 individual contributions from Ronald Sparacino and Lorna Padia Markins. Finally, she received a $1,000 contribution from Harriett Burt on Sept. 28 and a $2,000 contribution from John Neon (not sure about the spelling as it’s handwritten on campaign finance form) on Oct. 2.

Mike Menesini

The former mayor and councilman reported total contributions of $25,400 for the period ending Sept. 24, with $18,500 coming in the form of loans from himself. He’s collected $3,000 in contributions from the influential Dunivan downtown property management family and $1,000 from Richard Vanderkous.

Mark Ross

The longtime councilman’s filing for the period of Jan. 1 to June 30 showed that his coffers were filled with $18,284 in loans he had previously made to his campaign account. For the period from July 1 to Sept. 24, he reported $14,337 in total contributions received (including another loan of $6,287). Topping his list of contributions was $2,500 from IBEW 302 Candidates PAC; $2,000 from his father, Gene Ross; $1,500 from Sheet Metal Workers Local 104; and $1,000 from the California Real Estate PAC.

Sean Trambley

The Planning Commission chair was far ahead in the campaign money sweepstakes (voters can decide for themselves if that’s a good or bad thing). For the period of July 1 through Sept. 24, he reported a whopping $43,144 in total contributions. That amount included $10,000 in loans from himself and $4,900 in nonmonetary contributions. He continues to receive big bucks from contributors associated with the Velvet Cannabis dispensary, including a business donation of $4,900 from Green Firefly, LLC (owned by Farid Harrison), another $4,900 individual contribution from Velvet owner Harrison and a $1,000 contribution from Matthew Moreau, another Velvet principal (a reminder that Trambley played a key role in paving the way for Velvet’s owners to open the city’s first retail cannabis dispensary, over objections that was it too close to a training center frequented by youths). He also received a $4,900 donation from Scott Tranter, a data science and engineering professional who, according to his LinkedIn account, was the former director of data science for Florida Senator Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign. A search of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) website also shows that a person who appears to be the same Scott Tranter (multiple Scott Tranters are listed) has been a big contributor to WinRed, the primary fundraising platform for the Trump/MAGA-supported politicians, among other Republican campaigns.

Brianne Zorn

The first-term councilwoman reported a total of $16,244 in contributions from July 1 to Sept. 24. That included $2,453 in loans to herself (she paid back $3,838 of an initial loan amount of $6,291) and $2,000 in nonmonetary contributions. Her biggest single contribution ($4,900) came from Thousand Friends of Martinez. She also reported a $1,039.04 donation from Stacy Walker, a refrigeration contractor. On Sept. 29, she reported a donation of $4,900 from John Klopp.

CITY COUNCIL

District 1
Nakenya Allen

Relying exclusively on donations of $250 or less, the community activist/organizer reported contributions of $1,600 from Aug. 1 to Sept. 30. Kudos to Allen for running a truly grassroots campaign free of any money from organized interest groups. (My dream is that someday we’ll see an election in Martinez where all candidates pledge to accept only individual contributions in their races and swear off all special interest/political action committee (PAC) money.)

Jay Howard

Allen’s opponent is racking up big donations (more than most of the mayoral candidates), largely from organized interest groups. He reported $18,085.72 in contributions from Jan. 1 to Sept. 24 as well as a $4,000 loan from himself. His contributions include $4,900 from the Northern California Carpenters Regional Council (Howard is a carpenter); $4,900 from Building a Stronger California sponsored by Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters; $2,500 from LE03-AWIN Management Inc.; and $1,000 from IBEW 302 Community Candidates PAC. Adding to that total was a $1,500 contribution from Sheet Metal Workers Union 104 on Sept. 29.

District 4
Debbie McKillop

McKillop is well-funded in her race for a third term. She entered July with $7,688.50 in cash on hand in her re-election campaign account. She reported $12,400 in contributions in her filing ending Sept. 24 and ended the period with a cash balance of $12,291.31 for the home stretch of the campaign. Her contributions included a transfer of $4,900 from Contra Costa County Sheriff David Livingston’s 2026 re-election account (Livingston fended off McKillop’s challenger, Ben Therriault, in this year’s sheriff’s race). The manager of the Sheriff’s Office forensic lab, McKillop also received $2,000 from the Contra Costa Deputy Sheriff’s Association and $1,000 from the California Real Estate PAC Small Contributor Committee. Smaller contributions of note were $500 from West Coast Smoke Shop (Cigarettes 4 Less) and $250 from scandal-plagued county Assessor Gus Kramer. She also reported a $7,431 transfer of carryover funds from her 2018 campaign account.

Ben Therriault

The Richmond police officer/union president reported only one donation of $500 (from Leticia Marquez, director of John Stewart Co.) for the period ending Sept. 24.

ON TO THE FORUM: The YouTube videos from last week’s mayor’s and City Council candidates forum at the Campbell Theater are posted below for anyone who cares to watch (the mayor’s forum is about an hour and the City Council forum about 30 minutes). I watched both, and there were no real fireworks to report (other than a brief skirmish between Ross and Menesini over who was doing the worse job adhering to time limits). The biggest news I came away with wasn’t directly related to the candidates’ platforms but rather to the turmoil at City Hall, where current City Manager Eric Figueroa has been on leave and will be officially gone by the beginning of the year (longtime city official Michael Chandler has been tapped to replace him). The city has not divulged any details about what led to Figueroa’s leave and imminent departure, but Menesini (who called Figueroa a “disaster”) suggested it had something to do with a dysfunctional atmosphere at City Hall that’s led to significant staff turnover and vacancies. None of the three current council members on the panel said anything to dispute that.

One pleasant surprise from the panel was to see more discussion about the city’s housing situation and particularly the need to build more affordable housing, something that has been largely ignored in the campaign material I’ve seen and read to date. On the flip side, there was no meaningful discussion about some of the controversies that have dominated city politics in recent years, namely the issues around the city’s racial climate and anti-discrimination efforts that sprung from the Black Lives Matters protests, and the arrival of cannabis dispensaries in town that city officials chose to place closer to youths (at gyms or schools) than downtown businesses.

I found the most interesting dynamic in the mayoral forum to be Menesini’s and Trambley’s efforts to blame the incumbent council members for all the city’s problems while giving them absolutely no credit for any of the city’s successes (Trambley came right out and said the economic progress downtown was in spite of city leadership). As someone who has been quite tough at times on city leaders and their priorities, even I found such an assessment to be grossly unfair and reflective of the cheap political playbook that dominates national political finger-pointing between Democrats and Republicans (laying the blame on current council members for not solving the homelessness problem in Martinez is akin to blaming Joe Biden for not solving the inflation problem; in both cases, the solutions to these complex problems lie far outside the scope of powers for mayors or the president of the United States). And as someone who has directed some sharp barbs toward DeLaney and Ross in previous posts, let me just say that their knowledge of city finance and budgeting and the inner workings of city governance is impressive and an asset. My primary differences with them (and other current leaders) are around priorities and the lack of political courage I’ve seen from the council as a whole on some key topics that extend beyond economic development and fiscal management. Nothing I’ve heard from Menesini and Trambley leads me to believe they would be any different on that score; in fact, I fear they may be worse in a couple of areas. While DeLaney and Ross spent a lot of time defending their records and framing their campaigns around trying to build on successes, I thought Zorn struck an interesting middle ground between acknowledging success stories in the city in recent years (giving credit where credit is due), while also acknowledging the need to do much better in key areas, particularly in making City Hall more response to residents and transparent in the way it conducts the public’s business.

One final observation for anyone who might care: After watching five of the six mayoral candidates (Michael Ayers did not take part) and four City Council candidates make their pitches, I found District 4 council candidate Ben Therriault to be the most polished, thoughtful and far-reaching in his answers (I was also heartened to see a candidate finally address the topic of Martinez’s youth population, which is generally ignored both in City Council meetings and political campaigns, despite the fact we are dealing with a youth mental health crisis right now). Therriault’s strong showing may have been a reflection of the seasoning he received from his impressive campaign for sheriff against David Livingston earlier this year. Curious to hear what others think of who were the winners and losers from the night. Please feel free to share comments below, and if there are enough of them, I’ll spotlight some in a future post.

SHAMEFUL POST OF THE WEEK: We all heard a lot of talk two years ago by residents and city leaders alike about supporting the goals of the Black Lives Matter movement. Now, it’s a topic avoided like the plague by most campaigns (at least in terms of what they discuss and promote publicly). And to the extent that BLM is still thought about around town, it’s now sometimes treated as a joke. McKillop, who is running for a third term on the council, showed as much with a recent post of photos from the Zombie Crawl in Martinez on her political Facebook page that included attendees with a sign reading “Zombie Lives Matter.” I can’t think of something more insulting to the Black Lives Matter movement (whose purpose is to shine a light on lives destroyed by racial injustice in America) and the cause of racial justice and equity in our own town and America. It says a lot about our town and our political leadership that BLM is now as likely to be invoked as the butt of a joke as it is as a serious topic of discussion and reflection in public circles. Yes, Martinez (and much of White, privileged America) has moved on from the events of 2020. And, in this newsletter’s opinion, that is a shameful thing indeed.

AND ON A FINAL NOTE: The piece I published on the Martinez Unified School District elections last week seemed to strike a chord with a number of readers and is one of the most widely read posts to date. I’m sure a lot of that had to do with the question of what role, if any, a candidate’s financial contributions to the MAGA movement, and the Jan. 6 insurrection that resulted from it, should play in the candidate’s qualifications to sit on the school board. I know I’m not alone in being dismayed by the number of my fellow citizens in and outside Martinez who continue to treat MAGA as a normal, legitimate political movement, rather than what the facts have clearly shown it to be on such matters as respect for democracy and basic truths, racial tolerance and sensitivity, and norms of decency and integrity in government and politics, all of which it has repeatedly trampled on. I came across the following piece in the Washington Post last week by longtime evangelical Christian and political conservative Michael Gerson, who was the chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush, that I thought hit the nail on the head about why concerns about MAGA supporters and their fitness for elective office at any level is about so much more than different political ideologies. It made me wonder why if so many conservative Republicans can say this, why so many others in my hometown can’t. A snippet:

During his last campaign, Trump warned suburban White women that “low-income housing would invade” their neighborhoods. Now he teases that he might run in 2024 “to take back that beautiful, beautiful house that happens to be white.” Even using the language and argumentation of the playground, Trump does his damage. He implies that the institutions of American government are and should be White dominated. He directly defends the segregation of housing. He encourages the idea that minorities are aggressors against Whites.

And Trump effectively gives permission to other MAGA fools. “They want crime,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) said about Democrats at a recent Trump rally. “They want crime because they want to take over what you got. They want to control what you have. They want reparations because they think the people that do the crime are owed that.”

In MAGA world, the incitement of white grievance is the strategy. Such appeals are inseparable from racism. And they reopen a wound that nearly killed the patient before. It is politics at its most pernicious.