Posts Tagged ‘Emily Salgado’

Ethics Commission Announces Higher Spending Limits for Two Candidates in District 2 Supe Race

Friday, July 23rd, 2010

Well, as far as the District Two Supervisor race is concerned, the big news is the Sweet Melissa Griffin Debate on Wednesday, July 28th. You just don’t who all is going to come, that’s part of the drama. (Bonus: You might be able to search for that America’s Cup trophy up at the Golden Gate Yacht Club during the shebang.)

UPDATE: Debate Postponed

Anyway, the San Francisco Ethics Commission has something to say today. The upshot is that Abraham Simmons and Kat Anderson will be able to spend more dough.

That is, A.S. and…

…K.T. will soon be able to burn…

…more $$.

So, here are the debate deets - find the Ethic Commission announcement below.

What: D2 Candidate Debate featuring:

Kat Anderson
Mark Farrell
Janet Reilly
Abraham Simmons

***Please note: An invitation has been extended to Supervisor Michella Alioto-Pier pending the outcome of her legal challenge to the City’s determination that she may not run for another term.

WhereGolden Gate Yacht Club, 1 Yacht Rd., SF, 94123
When:  Wednesday, July 28th – 5:30 pm wine and light appetizers reception – 6:30 pm debate to start promptly

Officer Elections

Elections will take place immediately following the candidate forum.

It’s that time of the year when SFYD elects its Executive Board.  After the July 28th candidate debate SFYD members will vote on five elected positions.  The elected positions, the candidates and theirquestionnaires are below:

President - Maxwell Szabo
External Vice President - Emily Salgado
Internal Vice President - Renee Darner
Treasurer - Allie Fisher
Secretary - Dean Ignacio

 

SF ETHICS COMMISSION ANNOUNCES THAT THE INDIVIDUAL EXPENDITURE CEILING HAS BEEN RAISED FOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CANDIDATES IN DISTRICT 2

The San Francisco Ethics Commission announced today that it raised the Individual Expenditure Ceiling of two publicly financed candidates in District 2, Kat Anderson and Abraham Simmons, to $153,000.    The Individual Expenditure Ceiling for these two candidates was raised because the Total Supportive Funds of another candidate in the district totaled $160,915.  

Yesterday, Mark Farrell, a candidate for the Board of Supervisors in District 2, filed a form indicating that he has raised $160,915.  Accordingly, by law, the Ethics Commission was required to raise the Individual Expenditure Ceiling of publicly financed candidates in District 2. 

A table reflecting the Individual Expenditure Ceilings of all publicly financed candidates is updated as ceilings are adjusted and is posted on the Ethics Commission website at (http://www.sfethics.org/ethics/2010/05/campaign-finance-expenditure-ceilings-november-2-2010-election.html).

A candidate running for the Board of Supervisors who seeks public funding must abide by his or her Individual Expenditure Ceiling, which begins at $143,000, and may be raised in increments of $10,000 based on the sum of opposition spending against the participating candidate and the total supportive funds of the candidate’s opponents.  A candidate is required to file Form SFEC-152(a)-2 within 24 hours of receiving contributions or making expenditures that equal or exceed $100,000 and for every $10,000 thereafter.  Any person making independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or member communications that clearly identify a candidate for the Board of Supervisors is required to file Form SFEC-152(a)-3 within 24 hours of each time the person spends $5,000 or more per candidate. 

The Ethics Commission, established in November 1993, serves the public, City employees and officials and candidates for public office through education and enforcement of ethics laws.  Its duties include:  filing and auditing of campaign finance disclosure statements, lobbyist and campaign consultant registration and regulation, administration of the public financing program, conflict of interests reporting, investigations and enforcement, education and training, advice giving and statistical reporting.