Category Archives: Negative ads

Letter on Benicia Mayor’s race: ‘Disturbing to be repetitively assaulted by non-fact-based, character-smearing tactics’

Letter to the editor by Judi Sullivan of Benicia, October 23, 2020

‘This is the same PAC that infected our last election…’

Judi Sullivan, Benicia

As a Benicia resident, I find it disturbing to be repetitively assaulted by non-fact-based, character-smearing tactics showing up again in our city election via a well-funded, mass media/mailing PAC campaign. This is the same PAC that infected our last election with a series of lies slandering a well-qualified candidate. The PAC responsible for this behavior, titled, “Working Families for a Strong Benicia,” has The Valero Refinery listed as its main donor. The purpose of the PAC’s multiple forms of mass advertising is to support one candidate while at the same time, (flip side of the flyer), falsely slandering another for the position of our Benicia Mayor.

Do they feel their chosen candidate, Christina Strawbridge, is not capable of being elected on her own merits? Their desperate need to slam her opponent belies her own credibility. From an educated voter’s point of view, this ploy is disrespectful to both individuals.

The negative campaigning from our last election led to the citizen-suggested concept of creating a “Code of Ethics” among candidates for future city elections. Instigation of this code was adopted in response to the dirty politics we had just experienced.

Where is the accountability to this new “Code of Ethics” showing up in this election? What different, proactive responses are candidates taking to respond to the same debacle faced in 2018, prompting the need for this code? Some candidates running now, ( Steve Young, Christina Strawbridge and Tom Campbell), worked on creating this code.

So far, “Code of Ethics” credit is due to three current candidates who have chosen to take an active stand in response to the PAC’s repeatedly offensive negative modus operandi. They are Steve Young, along with Jason Diavatis, both of whom are running for Mayor, and Terry Scott for City Council. In addition, they offered alternative suggestions of more beneficial ways the PAC could support the needs of our city during these times of COVID & economic duress through the use of their abundant discretionary income. If interested, check out their quarter page newspaper ad in the Sunday, Oct. 11th edition of “The Benicia Herald.” These candidates are thanked for having the courage to publicly make a strong stand against dirty politics in our elections. I was hoping all of you would do so. If you took this stance repeatedly, dishonest negative politics could not be substantiated. Your continued collective outcry for lack of decency would undermine that game plan, no matter how much money went into the effort. As candidates, you have that power should you choose to use it. As citizens, we have that power, too.

The PAC referred to has knowingly overextended our city’s mandated contribution limits to run a campaign. No more than $34,200 per individual candidate is allowed to be raised by a campaign as regulated by our city’s election ordinance. This limit was set up for the purpose of keeping an even playing field where campaign financial contributions are concerned. However, over $200,00 this year has been spent so far by this PAC in support of Christina Strawbridge for Mayor. Last election she and Lionel Largaespada were funded by this same PAC. Needless to say, whomever the PAC supports has an unfair advantage financially and exposure-wise in the their attempt to “buy a seat(s)” in our city government.

Since 2010, when the CITIZENS UNITED National Mandate was formed, PAC’s have been enabled to contribute unlimited amounts to campaigns. Unfortunately, Federal Law super cedes our own city’s Election Ordinance Mandate. Although we cannot legally stop this influx of excess money from entering our elections, we can each voice our concerns for the inequity it creates by going against our local mandate. Under these circumstances, what is legal does not necessarily fall into the category of being ethical. I am also asking for ethical campaigning. For each candidate to stand up against obviously slanderous negative statements that are so offensive to most of us, regardless of whether it is denigrating our chosen candidate or another. It’s a despicable practice misrepresenting candidates.

I am requesting ALL candidates and funders of campaign strategies to focus on policy-based campaigning, using the foundation of facts, past and current experience
relevant to the position sought, along with accurate depictions of facets of the candidate’s character relating to the job they are seeking. What a refreshing change that would be!

Each of you can stand on your own merits. Do any of you really want to win based on maligned misinformation spread about your opponent? That is not a clean “win.” I hope each of you will step up by demonstrating the desire for a fair, honest election through consistent actions taken towards producing that goal. That may include daily repetitive comments to discount disreputable injustices propagated by surly ad campaigns. Each candidate, or preferably the candidates as a collective, can choose to demonstrate the strength and purpose of the newly formed “Code of Ethics.” Otherwise, this code is merely a collection of words on paper.

Respectfully submitted,
Judith S. Sullivan
41-year Benicia resident

Valero PAC – Expenditures of over $135,000 Sept 20 to Oct 17, now over $200K for the year

By Roger Straw, October 23, 2020

Valero Refinery’s commercial PAC, which is out to buy Benicia’s mayor’s seat in our 2020 election, filed its latest income and expenditure reports yesterday.

The reports are required by law and cover the period September 20 to October 17, as well as totals for 2020.

Form_460_Pre_Election_2.pdf shows income of $25,000 for the period, cash payments of $63,844 and unpaid bills of $71,275.  The form shows an ending balance of $173,779 as of October 17.

INCOME for the period September 20 to October 17
This period Year to date
Monetary Contributions (International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, forgers & Helpers Local 549) $25,000 $25,000
Total Contributions $25,000 $25,000
EXPENSES for the period September 20 to October 17
This period Year to date
Cash payments $63,844 $99,333
Accrued, unpaid bills $71,275 $101,567
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $135,119 $200,899
Current Cash Statement
Beginning Balance $212,623
Cash receipts $25,000
Cash payments $63,844
Ending Balance $173,779

The Valero PAC’s Form_465_2.pdf is a Supplemental Independent Expenditure Report.  This very important form carries detailed individual payments made to named companies for mailers, Facebook and other digital ads,  live phone calls and robocalls.  I must apologize for not presenting the information here.  The form is complicated, seems to overlap with previous reports, doesn’t total up accurately as far as I can tell, and so can’t be properly interpreted here.  Suffice to say, Valero has been busy spending tons of money to pick up the Benicia Mayor’s seat.  Check out their Form_465_2 on the City of Benicia website for details.

Valero PAC – Those 2 new mailers: $9,844 …and $11,000 more for ROBOCALLS

By Roger Straw, October 20, 2020

Valero PAC spending for purchase of the Benicia Mayor seat now at $91,688

VALERO’s sick attempt to buy the Benicia Mayor seat has disclosed it’s latest expenditures:

  • $11,000 for more ROBOCALLS
  • $9,844 for 2 recent ugly campaign mailers

In emails earlier today with the City of Benicia, the Benicia Independent confirmed that Benicia’s campaign finance ordinance requires the Valero PAC to submit for public review copies “of the literature or script used for each communication to the city clerk within 24 hours of the first time the mailings, calls, transmissions, or advertisements are made or aired.” (Benicia Municipal Ordinance 1.40.110).

The City posting of Valero’s newest report does indeed include photocopies and ROBOCALL scripts.  If you have the stomach for it, see Working_Families_for_a_Strong_Benicia_496_7.

The City of Benicia will be revising previously posted campaign financial reports that were posted without the required photocopies and scripts.  Stay tuned for links.


See also:

Benicia Mayor race: 2 more $Valero mailers smearing Steve Young

By Roger Straw, October 20, 2020
I have chosen NOT to display Valero’s most recent nasty mailers.  I won’t give them the time, space and bully pulpit here.  Read on for description and analysis…

There are two sides to the latest Valero PAC mailers: nasty slams on Young and Diavatis, and big name sweet promos for their candidate.

$Valero’s push to win the Benicia Mayor’s seat continues unabated, despite the requests by all candidates that they cease and desist.

The claim against Diavatis is instructive.  The Valero PAC claims to have paid for a poll that shows Diavatis can’t win.  When was the last time that ANY candidate in Benicia was able to afford polling?  Small towns don’t do polling.  But big oil money does.

Valero’s independent expenditure committee (PAC) has set aside around $250,000 for our little Mayor’s race, and spent over $70,000 as of October 9.  (Additional contribution of $25,000 now – see update here.)

The U.S. Supremes ruled that the Valero PAC is a person, and can spend as much as it likes on an election.  But here in Benicia, we have a fair campaign ordinance that limits REAL people who run for office to expenditures of no more than $34,200 per candidate.

The total spending of the three candidates for Mayor amount to 3 x $34,200 or $102,600.  Stack that total up against Valero’s $250,000, and you might think the playing field is a little slanted?  And recall that one of the REAL person campaigns will be Valero’s chosen candidate, so it’s actually $250,000 plus their candidate’s $34,200, for a grand total of over $284,000.  Plunk down that kind of money against any one or two candidates, and see what happens.

That wouldn’t be fair even if Valero played nice.

I have chosen NOT to scan and post Valero’s most recent mailers.  I won’t give them the time, space and bully pulpit here.  Suffice to say the ads are all on file with me.  (Oh, and… the Benicia fair campaign ordinance requires that Valero submit photocopies of their ads, like they did in 2018 when they smeared candidate Kari Birdseye.  Why have we NOT seen photocopies in any of their 6 submitted 496 Independent Expenditure forms?)


See also: