Campaign Donations Should Come From Residents—NOT Special Interests

Bill Brand for City Council - An Ethical Candidate. Bill’s donations come from the residents of District 2. He turns away donations from special interests.

As the treasurer for Bill Brand’s re-election campaign for City Council in Redondo Beach in District 2, I’m responsible for filing all the required financial statements accurately and on time. Bill has raised $8,754 to date, and with the generosity of the locals he represents, expects to reach his goal of $12,000 by election day, March 5.

Other than from some extended family members, Bill’s donations come from the residents of District 2. He turns away donations from special interests like developers, trash companies, consultants, businesses and Harbor leaseholders.  As his treasurer, I cringe but admire at some of the donations he has declined to prevent even a hint of conflict with the residents that elected him.

Not so with his opponent Michael Jackson. He has raised a whopping $17,391 so far, but only $1,550 from District 2 residents. Over 90 percent of Michael Jackson's donations are from outside District 2, like businesses and individuals in Sacramento. Clearly, outside, non-resident interests are funding his campaign.

Only five individuals that actually live in District 2 in Redondo Beach have donated to Michael Jackson’s campaign.

All the candidate records and filings are available for viewing at the City Clerk's office. 

Linda Moffat

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Kelly Sarkisian February 05, 2013 at 07:55 PM
This translates into, " I have less support than my opponent, I'm going attempt to make him look bad for being well supported". Maybe the money Jackson has raised is a strong sign that local businesses are tired of the current council. Seems like Jackson is paving a new direction for Redondo, a less obstructionist direction.
Jim Light February 05, 2013 at 11:16 PM
What you call less obstructionist, I call pro-developer. It is what has gotten Redondo into our overcondoized over developed situation today.Our town has been controlled by Chamberites for too long. Time to let some fresh blood in. Bill Brand has been a refreshing voice of the people. That does not mean anti-development. That means balanced development... development that balances developer profits with resident quality of life. That means some heavy lifting by the city to attract good businesses not just more businesses. That means quality dvelopment over over-development. I believe the source of donations is something that voters should take into account when weighing their vote. Obviously that is why the public reporting requirement exists.
L. Campeggi February 06, 2013 at 03:05 AM
It's interesting that we don't notice this important part of elections. What candidates say is one thing. Of equal importance is knowing the sources of their campaign contributions. For those just beginning a run for political office, the records might not show much, which is to be expected. That's not bad news, either. But when you see the contributions to a candidate coming from outside the jurisdiction in which they're running, that's cause for concern. All candidates have to file with the city clerk. Also, all PACs (Political Action Committees) must do the same. Check out NoPowerPlant.com - over $60,000 raised since June 2012, with the majority from scores of Redondo Beach residents. Prior to the PAC formation, NoPowerPlant raised approximately $35,000 for another PAC to fund the writing and legal fees of what is now Measure A. This proves that Measure A truly is "By Residents, For Residents." No special interest money, just the people of Redondo Beach, contributing almost $100,000 for YES on A. If you want to find out just WHO is funding WHO or what, get the records from the City Clerk. Look closely. When you see the majority of a candidate's campaign contributions coming from outside of their jurisdiction, pay particular attention, as THAT is who and what you might really be voting for. I just looked at the District 2 information. Contrary to "Fake Kelly's" continual falsehoods, Bill Brand has local support from District 2 voters. Jackson does not.
Fred Reardon February 06, 2013 at 04:12 AM
Bill Brand has earned our support. Let's re-elect him.
Kelly Sarkisian February 06, 2013 at 05:23 AM
Bill Brand, like Jim Light is a one issue candidate. He sat on the council while public safety was eviscerated and while the city wasted millions in signs, fountains ect. He also sat back and allowed the City Manager to do as he pleased. The CM serves at the pleasure of the elected City Council. Brand has his one issue, he is too focused on one thing, the city is too big with many other issues to have a laser focus.
Kelly Sarkisian February 06, 2013 at 05:27 AM
I'm dissappointed in you. You were the last of the npp folks that actually seemed reasonable. You have now joined the group of let's bash Kelly because she doesn't agree with us. Although, I find it very interesting that ALL of you find the time/need to comment on my posts. If I am so fake, why the need to reply?...I guess I'm hitting close to home! Thanks for the validation!
L. Campeggi February 06, 2013 at 05:29 AM
Kelly Sarkisian is a fictitious name - no such person exists as a registered voter in Redondo Beach.
Jim Light February 06, 2013 at 05:39 AM
Kelly you are not a registered voter in Redondo. You have no address in Redondo. You claim to follow the issues, yet no one has ever met you. It is easy to sit back and attack with a fake name. When the debate is lost, slander is the tool of the loser.
Kelly Sarkisian February 06, 2013 at 06:26 AM
Jim, we have met, you just don't remember. I've also met and spoken to Brand multiple times. I'm sorry I was forgettable. I do have an address in the city, just not one you can find with your Internet stalking!
Jim Light February 06, 2013 at 06:32 AM
Nice try. No one's buying it.
Alexander Starr February 06, 2013 at 07:16 PM
Clearly Michael Jackson, RB City Council Candidate for District 2, has been corrupted by special interests. This has been proven now as 90% of his campaign contributions have been funded by special interests from OUTSIDE his district. Michael Jackson is a front for the Chamber, whose sole aim is to unseat Bill Brand who is unbeholden to them. Jackson is pro new power plant, pro over-developement, pro special interests. Do not trust him, do not vote for him. He does not represent the average resident. RE-ELECT BILL BRAND FOR DISTRICT 2!
Robert Keane February 07, 2013 at 05:59 AM
Well No. Bill Brand is a single issue candidate that cares only about the power plant and nothing else. He supported a lawsuit against the taxpayer he was suppose to protect. That suit cost the city nearly a million dollars......and that was just in his first term!! No thank you. We simply can't afford four more years of Bill Brand
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 06:13 AM
Now Robert, there you go again distorting the facts by only telling part of the story. Here are the facts Robert conveniently left out. 1) The City Council voted to violate the City Charter. 2) The people pulled together the money to get a lawyer to sue the City to force the City Council to follow the Charter. 3) The judge ruled the City Council violated the City Charter. 4) The City Council complied with the judge's order but then decided to appeal anyway, doubling legal costs. 5) A three judge panel unanimously voted to throw out the City's frivolous appeal. The City Council got caught breaking the City Charter. They ignored their constituents and the Charter. So it was not Brand who cost the City money. It was the arrogant actions of a Council who felt they were above the law who cost the City money. And then they voted to double the cost with a frivolous appeal. Brand was the lone Councilman standing up for the City Charter and the voters of Redondo. Robert berates the one guy who was looking out for us. Robert, your anger should be directed at the lawbreakers. Not the Councilman looking out for us.
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 06:25 AM
From the Easy Reader..."After NoPowerPlant.com and Building a Better Redondo (BBR) submitted 7,468 valid signatures required to get the AES power plant zoning initiative on the ballot, the City Council decided to postpone their decision about how to proceed after the City received an email at around noon on Tuesday from NoPowerPlant.com lawyers Strumwasser & Woocher threatening a potential lawsuit if the initiative is not put on the ballot" Imagine that,threatening lawsuits at every turn. The people who want to represent this city (Brand/ Light) are the ones who are quick with lawsuits against the city. The previous lawsuit, the threat of this one are two GREAT reasons to vote for someone else!
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 06:47 AM
This is America Kelly. There is a rule of law. And this is a democracy. The California State Constitution reserves the right to initiative to the voters. The voters met the requirements of the Constitution of California to qualify an initiative. AES threatened a lawsuit if the City put the initiative on the ballot through some bogus logic. We merely stated we would defend the rights of the voters. Notice that AES backed down. They were bluffing. They knew they had no legal basis to stop the initiative from being put on the ballot. Once again you attack the wrong people. You should be attacking AES for trying to intimidate the Council into disenfranchising the voters and the 7400+ resident voters who signed the petitions. You say you are against a power plant, but then you give AES a free pass at their blatant attempt to manipulate and intimidate the Council. Maybe you don't understand this because you are not a registered voter in our city. Those who cherish our rights enough to defend them follow in the footsteps of our founders. We should embrace them rather than denigrate them.
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 07:04 AM
Btw. Have you thought about this being my married name? I may have been married this year. I have till the 25th if I chose to vote in this election under my married name, but thanks for playing! Once again, I have proven you to get stuck on one thing, just like AES. There are alternatives to issues Jim, free your mind!
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 07:16 AM
Keep trying Kelly. Still not buying it. Quit hiding behind your fake name. And all folks have to do is go to www.jimlightforcouncil.com to see my platform and track record demonstrate I'm much more than a one issue candidate.
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 07:21 AM
Wow. Even simple plausible solutions bypass you. Your way or the highway! You have my name! Yes, your "10" year track record of suing the city, threatening lawsuits, getting stuck on one issue while missing the rest and generally being an obstructionist! Got it, ten year record!
L. Campeggi February 07, 2013 at 07:32 AM
One of the more common tactics of those who can't provide a good refutation of an argument is to divert attention away from the argument by calling attention to something about the person who made the argument. The ad hominem is attractive to lazy thinkers, who would rather ridicule or belittle a person than seriously examine an opposing viewpoint. Kelly Sarkisian is not a Redondo Beach registered voter.
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 07:35 AM
No one's buying it or your smear. It is just too obvious. I stand by my record and invite voters to review it. If stopping 3000 condos in the harbor area is obstructionist, then I wear that title proudly. That zoning was bad for our City. Thousands agreed with me. Hundreds of condos on Torrance would have been bad too. Most of our votes on the Citizen's Growth Management and Traffic Committee were unanimous. So I was not obstructionist there. I don't think Fred Brunning of CenterCal considers my participation "obstructionist" to date (didn't see you there by the way, not surprised). You continue to go off on suing the city yet you continue to leave out the City violated the City Charter. The Council is not above the Charter. Suing them for violating it was the right thing to do. They tried to illegally disenfranchise their voters and they got called on it. Shame on them, not me.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »