Category Archives: Negative campaigning

2020 elections, Benicia elections, Campaign finance, Negative ads, Negative campaigning, Steve Young, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero PAC

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:

2020 elections, Benicia elections, Jason Diavatis, Negative ads, Negative campaigning, Steve Young, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero PAC

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:

2020 elections, Benicia elections, Benicia Mayor, Fair elections, Negative campaigning, Steve Young, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero PAC

Benicia Mayor candidate Steve Young: Finding common ground with Valero when they want me to lose SO badly

By Roger Straw, October  19, 2020
The Benicia Herald, Sunday, October 18, p. A5

Candidate for Benicia Mayor Steve Young took out a half-page ad in Sunday’s print edition of the Benicia Herald, laying out steps Valero could take to be a “better neighbor to Benicia.”

The ad headline asks, WHY DO VALERO & THEIR FRIENDS WANT ME TO LOSE SO BADLY?

Candidate Young continues,

I appreciate the value Valero brings to Benicia and their generosity to assist the community.  But appreciating the good they do and being critical of their negative politics are not mutually exclusive.  It’s not either or.  We can and should do both.

The strain between Valero and the City is often attributed to their contentions relationships with specific candidates and elected officials.  I just don’t see it that way.  I think the blame rests on their response (or lack thereof) to a concerned community and the lengths they have gone to disrupt elections that have historically been fair & friendly.  We need a Mayor with the necessary experience to find a common ground that will enable Valero to become a “”Better Neighbor” to Benicia.  Where do we start?

Young then lays out 3 bullet points for a better relationship with Valero:

PROTECTING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF BENICIANS AND THEIR FAMILIES MUST COME FIRST.

    • Increase transparency & improve communication including immediate community alerts for any incident impacting resident health, safety or environment, followed by regular updates and instructions on how to respond.
    • Air quality monitoring systems that work in conjunction with public alerts in accordance with official City policy & procedure.
    • Cease all negative campaigning practices and allow Benicia voters to elect candidates in accordance with City’s Election Code.  Keep elections fair and stop the spread of false or misleading attack ads.

Young then addresses outside election influence and Benicia’s future if Valero continues its negative campaign tactics:

IF WE ALLOW VALERO’S PAC TO WIN A MAYOR’S SEAT, A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT WILL BE SET AS A RESULT.

If Valero’s PAC succeeds, we can expect these same destructive tactics in every Benicia election going forward.  It’s time we take a stand and let them know, “Enough is enough!”   You can start by electing me as your next Mayor.  I have the right qualifications and the temperament to repair the discord between the City and Valero, and help heal the divide felt within our community.  I’m ready to get to work!

Young concludes with a statement about big outside money and an invitation for Valero to choose a better course:

MONEY DOESN’T VOTE, YOU AND I DO.  BENICIA ELECTIONS SHOULD BE DECIDED BY BENICIA VOTERS.

I encourage Valero to seize this opportunity and choose to be better.  Restore the peace in our politics, reset your relationship with the community, and work with the City as equal parties, both deserving mutual trust, respect and transparency.  Vote for me, STEVE YOUNG, either on, or before November 3rd.  If elected Mayor of Benicia, I pledge to do whatever it takes to achieve these common goals.

See also:

Benicia CA, Benicia City Council, Campaign finance, Electoral politics, Fair elections, Local elections, Negative ads, Negative campaigning, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero Services Inc.

My thoughts on possible District Voting in Benicia

By Roger Straw, January 17, 2020
Roger Straw, The Benicia Independent

On Tuesday January 21, Benicia’s City Council will consider a proposal to change our electoral process from At-Large voting for Council candidates to four newly-defined small geographical districts.  Benicia citizens need to pay attention to this – it may sound ok, but consider…

I think our ability to join forces against the massive and mean-spirited outside corporate influences we saw in our 2018 election would be immeasurably weakened by adoption of district voting.

In 2018, a PAC funded by Valero Services and organized labor spent over $200,000 to smear and defeat Council candidate Kari Birdseye.  (See below for background.)  A similar campaign was waged against candidate Elizabeth Patterson in 2007.

A Council campaign funded and run in a small Benicia district would not be capable of standing up to limitless corporate PAC money.  And Benicia is way too small to be divided into four districts capable of finding and supporting multiple competitive candidates across the political spectrum.

In many cities, district voting makes sense as a measure to strengthen and empower concentrated minority groups.  Note that I am decidedly in FAVOR of empowering minority voting strength, especially when it comes to racial and ethnic minorities.  Most of us would agree.  But Benicia’s racial and ethnic mix is not concentrated in any linear district – so district voting would do absolutely nothing to advance minority voting strength.

What about other sub-groups in geographically defined parts of Benicia?

Our Southampton hills 1) is already represented by Mr. Largaespada, 2) could have elected Kari Birdseye as a Southampton neighbor if she hadn’t been targeted and smeared, and 3) had Mark Hughes as a resident Council member for years.  I’m guessing Southampton probably had a few more Council members going back before my time.

A case CAN probably be made that Benicia’s East Side has been underrepresented over the years – but district voting would create more problems than it would fix for Eastsiders.  IMPORTANT: How could an underfunded campaign in a smaller population on the East side possibly put up a fight against Valero and organized labor?!

CORRECTION: A kind reader has pointed out that current Council member Tom Campbell lives on Benicia’s East side.  Campbell and former Council member Jan Cox-Golovich live in a section of town north of Military and just EAST of an imaginary First Street dividing line.

MY CONCLUSION: District voting would only give outside big money greater strength to stack our City Council.

Your voice is important!

BACKGROUND ON BENICIA’S 2018 CORPORATE SMEAR CAMPAIGN

    • My background article on Jan 6, 2020 with quote from SF Chronicle, stating over $200,000 was spent by the Valero PAC.  My comment: “Kari ran for City Council in 2018 in a field of 4, competing for 2 seats on Council.  Only she didn’t just run against her opponents.  She ran against a $200,000-plus smear campaign orchestrated by Benicia Valero Refinery and its friends in organized labor.  The three major candidates’ campaigns spent less than $30,000 each, while Valero saturated our phone lines, mailboxes, newspapers and social media with misinformation and ugly photos.”
    • My post-election call on Nov 12 2018 for Council action to reform campaign spending – including comparison of the $200,000 with candidate spending of under $30,000 each.
    • My Oct 28 2018 article just before the Nov election which reported a smear campaign total of $155,000 as of that time. My  comment in that article: “News broke in late September that a major worldwide corporate power had bullied its way into our local democratic process.  Valero Services Inc., based in Texas but with 115 subsidiaries in Delaware, Michigan, Canada and several wealthy Caribbean nations, decided it wanted to buy a seat on the Benicia City Council. Their first strategy was to spend an unknown amount of money to employ two national firms, EMC Research and Research America, to conduct a nasty telephone “push poll,” blatantly mischaracterizing and demeaning one candidate for Council and painting rosy pictures of two others.  When our City Attorney challenged the polling firms, Valero Refinery executive Don Wilson admitted that Valero paid for the poll, but neither he nor the polling firms would comply with our demands for more information.”
    • Weekly and daily reporting of details as the smear campaign unfolded: benindy.wpengine.com/?s=birdseye