With less than three weeks to go before the election, the campaign for and against appointing the City’s city clerk (Measure A) and police chief (Measure B) is in high gear. The opposition campaign is being run by Santa Clara Police Association PAC rather than by a purpose-formed committee. Supporters of the measure have formed a conventional political committee.
Sacramento Law Enforcement PAC Financing “No” Campaign
Armed with $30,000 from a Sacramento–based law enforcement PAC* and $25,000 from union coffers, the Santa Clara Police Officers Association last week launched its campaign against an appointed police chief in the city of Santa Clara.
So far, the police PAC has reported spending about $50,000, all of it on negative ads attacking city council members and the 49ers. To date, the 49ers have taken no role whatsoever in the campaign.
Only 11 Santa Clara police officers live in the City.
The police PAC’s largest donor to date is the Sacramento-based Police Officers Research Association of California Public Issues (PORA PIC) PAC. A law enforcement advocacy group, the PAC donates to law enforcement-related measures and gets most of its money from California law enforcement union PACs. PORAPIC didn’t respond to The Weekly’s request for information about its support for this measure.
The kickoff, announced on social media, was held at the police union hall, with the mayor Lisa Gillmor, Council Member Kathy Watanabe (who are also donors), current police chief (and former police union president) Pat Nikolai and current union president Jeremy Schmidt presiding over the donuts and coffee for the event.
Measures A and B would make the jobs of city clerk and police chief appointed positions requiring professional qualifications, with appointments made by the city manager.
Currently, the only qualification to be a city clerk is being registered to vote in Santa Clara.
The police chief job requires slightly more qualifications. As well as being a registered voter in Santa Clara, the police chief, at a minimum, must have a high school diploma and four years policing experience.
In addition to spending on billboards, door hangers, mailers and postage, the police PAC also paid $15,000 to the Sutton Law Firm for “legal costs to oppose Measure B in the City of Santa Clara.” Sutton Law represented the complainants in an unsuccessful lawsuit against the Measures A and B ballot language.
Unregistered Political Group Continues Its Unreported Campaign Spending
The unregistered political committee, Stand Up for Santa Clara, is also spending money on the campaign. Since last November, it has been buying Facebook ads also attacking city council members and the 49ers, although to date, it appears that it has only spent about $500-$600 (as reported by Meta). The group doesn’t file FPPC-mandated reports, claiming that it is a 501(c)(3) charity.
Complaints were made last fall that the group is violating Santa Clara’s dark money ordinance, but so far, the City has taken no action.
“Yes” Campaigns Funded Locally
By contrast, supporters of appointing these critical city positions have formed Yes on A and Yes on B committees. Currently, these committees each have received $2,000 from Council Member Suds Jain. Spending to date has been on Facebook advertising, websites and state filing costs.
For more information on campaign funding, read our guide to following the political money.
*Funneling money through multiple PACs is sometimes called “gray money” political spending because it obscures the original sources of the money.
