Posts Tagged ‘Ethics Commission’

Richmond District Supervisor Eric Mar Throws Down: Becomes the First Candidate of 2012 to Qualify for Public Financing

Monday, July 2nd, 2012

Here’s the latest from the Eric Mar campaign:

“Supervisor Eric Mar First Candidate To Qualify for Public Financing

SAN FRANCISCO, July 2, 2012 – Late on Friday afternoon, Supervisor Eric Mar’s re-election campaign received the official word from the San Francisco Ethics Commission that he is the first candidate in the city, from any district or any race, to qualify to receive public matching funds.

Supervisor Mar’s campaign will receive their first $20,000 in qualifying public funds from the city shortly.

Campaign spokeswoman Nicole Derse said, “This accomplishment highlights Supervisor Mar’s broad community support and the strength of our grassroots campaign. We are proud to be the only candidate in the city to have met this goal.”

To receive public financing, a candidate must collect at least $15,000 in qualifying contributions from San Franciscans for donations up to $100. Although many candidates, including Supervisor Mar, have raised substantially more funds than that, the threshold for public financing measures the quantity of low-dollar donations. Supervisor Mar’s campaign has received donations from over 450 individual donors, the vast majority of them from San Franciscans in amounts from $5-$100.

“I am incredibly honored to be the first candidate in the city to qualify for public financing. I look forward to engaging thousands of Richmond residents in our grassroots campaign over the next four months,” said Supervisor Eric Mar.

Supervisor Mar is running a strong grassroots campaign, and signature gathering and voter contact efforts will further intensify in July.

Supervisor Mar’s re-election campaign will open the doors on their new Richmond office at 5812 Geary Blvd. (at 22nd Avenue) this week and will hold an office opening celebration and signature gathering mobilization next Saturday, July 7th at 12:00 Noon.

Supervisor Mar will be updating information on his campaign regularly at his website www.ReelectMar.com

Aslan, the Lion of the Richmond, is, once again, on the move, the same as four years ago:

Sorry, CW Nevius. The conservative-faction victory you, for some reason, so desperately seek won’t be found in District One. Not this year.

Q&A: Why Does Area Republican Billionaire Ron Conway Support Mayor Ed Lee? The Answer from Anonymous: Twitter

Friday, November 4th, 2011

Don’t know who wrote this:

“Why does Ron Conway support Ed Lee?

The Twitter tax deal.

Also:

Political naïveté or influence peddling

Willie Brown

Ron’s increasingly involved in SF money politics

Ed’s gonna win; Ron backs winners early and throws the losers an anchor

Ron’s either buying influence or getting played, take your pick; he’s pouring money into a race that’s already a lock, behind a candidate just waiting for voters to confirm what everyone knows. If naïveté, Willie Brown is using the Twitter deal to pull Ron and his money on board an already winning campaign. If influence peddling, Ron’s using his money to buy himself some friends by backing the clear winner of the race early.

On the face of things, Ron’s a huge fan of the Twitter tax deal that Ed Lee supported after progressive-backed Supervisor Jane Kim surprisingly swung behind Twitter’s demands, making the deal possible. Word on the SF politico street is that the deal was primarily a supervisorial fight between the progressive forces of John Avalos and Chris Daly and the downtown interests getting somewhat behind the big tech scene, rather than being a mayor-driven initiative. It was no surprise that there was a long line of companies right behind Twitter looking to enlarge that financial hole Twitter forced open.

But here’s the political situation Ron has bought into: Willie wants Ed to get a smashing mandate and is seen as the power behind the throne at this point, having convinced a reluctant Ed to run for election after repeatedly promising he would not run. Willie even convinced Ed to break Ed’s deal with the Board to not run in exchange for being appointed in the first place. Considering two Supervisors are currently running for mayor, Ed’s name isn’t worth dirt in political SF. Unless you want something from the Mayor’s office, in which case, hello, buddy!

The other campaigns, especially Leland Yee and David Chiu turned their guns on Lee as soon as he entered, calling him a puppet and a liar in only slightly nicer terms. They failed; Ed survived. Ed is now holding steady at ~35% in the polls after a brief dip down to 30%, with about 40% undecided as of two weeks ago. It’d be shocking compared to the race before Ed entered, but this 4-5 serious candidate race may be over in a single round rather than using the rank choice voting system that was supposed to make this such an interesting cycle.”

On It Goes, after the jump

(more…)

“ETHICS COMMISSION ANNOUNCES THAT THE INDIVIDUAL EXPENDITURE CEILING HAS BEEN RAISED FOR MAYORAL CANDIDATES”

Wednesday, October 19th, 2011

After-hours news:

“SF ETHICS COMMISSION ANNOUNCES THAT THE INDIVIDUAL EXPENDITURE CEILING HAS BEEN RAISED FOR MAYORAL CANDIDATES”

So, look forward to even more of your money to be spent like this:

Click to expand

All the deets:

The San Francisco Ethics Commission announced today that it raised the Individual Expenditure Ceiling of nine publicly financed mayoral candidates, Michela Alioto-Pier, John Avalos, David Chiu, Bevan Dufty, Tony Hall, Dennis Herrera, Joanna Rees, Phil Ting and Leland Yee, to $1,575,000. The Individual Expenditure Ceiling for these nine candidates was raised because the Total Supportive Funds of another candidate totaled $1,577,875.

Based on filings received by the Ethics Commission yesterday, Total Supportive Funds of Ed Lee, a candidate for Mayor, totaled $1,577,875. Accordingly, by law, the Ethics Commission was required to raise the Individual Expenditure Ceiling of all publicly financed mayoral candidates.

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/2011/03/campaign-finance-expenditure-ceilings-november-8-2011-election.html

A candidate running for Mayor who seeks public funding must abide by his or her Individual Expenditure Ceiling, which begins at $1,475,000, and may be raised in increments of $100,000 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(b)-2 within 24 hours of receiving contributions or making expenditures that equal or exceed $1,000,000 and for every $50,000 thereafter. Any person making independent expenditures, electioneering communications, or member communications that clearly identify a candidate for Mayor is required to file Form SFEC-152(b)-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.

Contact: John St. Croix”

Publicly Financed Candidate’s Name IEC
Alioto-Pier, Michela $1,575,000
Avalos, John $1,575,000
Chiu, David $1,575,000
Dufty, Bevan $1,575,000
Hall, Tony $1,575,000
Herrera, Dennis $1,575,000
Rees, Joanna $1,575,000
Ting, Phil $1,575,000
Yee, Leland $1,575,000

Oh No, Ed Lee! Rose Pak and Willie Brown Throw Down Against SF Ethics Commission in Sing Tao Daily!

Monday, August 8th, 2011

I don’t know what to make of this image below.

Is it a portion of yesterday’s Sing Tao Daily? (And, if so, wouldn’t that please Caroline Chen of the SF Weekly?)

And does it have some bons mots from Chinatown ward healer Rose Pak and former Mayor Willie Brown?

And does it concern their reactions to the San Francisco Ethics Commission coming down hard on defunct (or maybe not-so-defunct after allRun Ed Run and area attorney Enrique Pearce?

As always, You Make The Call.

Exhibit A, from Rose Pak, on the topic of the recent statements from San Francisco Ethics Commission Executive Director John St. Croix:

“He doesn’t even know the U.S. Constitution. I don’t know how he does his job. How can you deprive people of their rights to volunteer for a campaign? It is unheard in history that if someone enters the race, those who helped him before are not allowed to help him again,” said Pak.

Snap!

And Exhibit B, from His Willieness*:

 “Former Mayor Willie Brown said St. Croix obviously does not understand what democracy is about. His anti-Ed Lee position has disqualified himself for his post. “When you announce your candidacy, I will not be able to support you. This is just unbelievable,” said Brown.”

(Keep in mind when you hear allegations of constitutionality and whatnot, that Willie Brown went to UC Hastings School of Law and Enrique Pearce and Mayor Ed Lee both attended UC Berkeley’s Boalt Hall.)

See? Read it for yourself:

Oh, how about this crude translation? It’s the best I can do right now:

“In response to the letter from San Francisco Ethics Commission Director John St. Croix, supporters of Ed Lee for Mayor reprimanded St. Croix for actions being based on nothing. They also questioned his qualification for the position. 

Chinese Chamber of Commerce consultant Rose Pak described it the biggest joke of the world. She said it is full of nonsense. He didn’t know what he’s talking about. “He doesn’t even know the U.S. Constitution. I don’t know how he does his job. How can you deprive people of their rights to volunteer for a campaign? It is unheard in history that if someone enters the race, those who helped him before are not allowed to help him again,” said Pak.

Enrique Pearce had consulted St. Croix. However, the latter said differently afterwards. Besides, he didn’t provide written replies to questions that Progress for All raised or gave explanations, said Rose Pak. “I will be the first one not to comply. You don’t have the authority to formulate the law, which is not free to go by your interpretation.”

 Former Mayor Willie Brown said St. Croix obviously does not understand what democracy is about. His anti-Ed Lee position has disqualified himself for his post. “When you announce your candidacy, I will not be able to support you. This is just unbelievable,” said Brown.

Hey, what do you think? Is this an accurate translation? Tell me, tell me if you think the translation isn’t good.

*Speaking of Willie Brown (who still writes for the San Francisco Chronicle) and Rose Pak (who used to write for the San Francisco Chronicle), here’s a bit (in the San Francisco Chronicle) from Willie on Rose circa April 2011:

Holding court at the party for the opening of the new airport terminal, Rose was seated at the table with interim Mayor Ed Lee and his wife, Anita, and a host of other local officials.

“I want every one of you to call his office and tell him he should run for mayor,” Rose told the table. “And do it right away so that there’s no misunderstanding.”

Then she turned to the architect David Gensler.

“Didn’t you do this terminal?” she asked.

“Yes,” he said.

“Didn’t you remodel this terminal before?”

“Yes,” he said.

“Then your firm should raise a million dollars for his election campaign.”

Poor Gensler, he didn’t know what hit him.”

The Full Statement of Five Front-Running Mayoral Candidates Calling for an Investigation of the “Run, Ed, Run” Campaign

Friday, July 29th, 2011

John Coté had the news this morning in SFGate* about recent developments – it’s the talk of the town.

Now, here’s the statement itself, in its entirety:

“Five San Francisco Mayoral Candidates Call For Investigation Of “Run, Ed, Run” Campaign

Alioto-Pier, Chiu, Herrera, Rees, and Yee Urge SF Ethics Commission To Pursue Allegations In New Ethics Letter 

Today, five current San Francisco mayoral candidates called on the San Francisco Ethics Commission to investigate allegations that Progress for All – the political committee behind the “Run Ed Run” campaign – has violated San Francisco’s Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance.

In its initial filings in May, Progress for All declared itself to be a General Purpose Committee, “not formed to support or oppose specific candidates or measures in a single election.”  Today, a letter filed with the Ethics Commission alleges that Progress for All misled the Commission, and is actually an independent expenditure committee formed for the purpose of supporting Mayor Ed Lee as a candidate in this November’s election.  Furthermore, as an independent expenditure committee, the letter alleges that Progress for All has coordinated their activities with the Mayor in violation of Section 1.115(a)(1) of the San Francisco Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance.

The joint statement of the five candidates is included below:

“The allegations made today against Progress for All and Run Ed Run are serious and deserve the immediate and full attention of the San Francisco Ethics Commission.  As competing candidates, we may not agree on which one of us should be the next Mayor, but as San Franciscans, we all strongly believe that this election must be contested on a level playing field.  Throughout this campaign, the five of us have played by the rules and complied with all relevant campaign finance laws and regulations.  We urge the Commission to pursue these allegations and ensure that Progress for All and Run Ed Run are held to the same standard.”

-Michela Alioto-Pier, David Chiu, Dennis Herrera, Joanna Rees and Leland Yee

Anyway, you know, for the record and whatnot…

Yowzer.

*Come for the breaking news, stay for the Frieda Pinto photos at the bottom of the page. Yowzer otra vez.