Bates outraises opponents by 70%; Yes on S gets $90k

Incumbent mayor Bates has raised $84,339 for his re-election campaign, 70% more than his two leading challengers. Photo: Tracey Taylor

Incumbent mayor Tom Bates has raised nearly 70% more than his two most prominent challengers combined, according to the latest campaign filings available through the City Clerk’s election portal. In the first three weeks of October, Bates raised $28,913 taking his total to $84,339. Councilman Kriss Worthington raised $8,459 in the period, bringing his total to $27,489. Jacquelyn McCormick garnered $5,970, for a total this year of $22,480.

In the heated District 5 race between incumbent Laurie Capitelli and Sophie Hahn, the two candidates are closely matched in fundraising, with less than $2,000 separating their totals. Capitelli has dramatically outspent Hahn in the three-week period, $8,356 to $3,492, nearly catching up with Hahn’s earlier spending.

In other races, incumbent Darryl Moore has vastly outraised his challengers, Denisha DeLane and Adolfo Cabral, in District 2, and incumbent Max Anderson has raised nearly double the amount challenger Dmitri Belser has raised in District 3, although Belser has stepped up both fundraising and spending in the first three weeks of October.

In the school board race, however, incumbent Beatriz Leyva-Cutler lags behind both Judy Appel and Tracy Hollander in both fundraising and spending. Leyva-Cutler raised $4,135 in the three-week period, but that takes her total to $10,685, nearly $5,000 behind Hollander and a little more than half of Appel’s total. Both Appel and Hollander spent more than $10,000 in the three weeks, while Leyva-Cutler spent just over $1,000. But Leyva-Cutler now has more cash on hand than Hollander, and nearly as much as Appel.

Some of the 10 measures on Berkeley ballot have also seen vigorous fundraising in the reporting period (full details of the money supporting or opposing all the measures can be found on Voter’s Edge, which Berkeleyside created together with MapLight). Supporters of the sitting ordinance, Measure S, raised $35,450 in the three weeks, largely thanks to five $5,000 donors, bringing to $90,900 the total amount raised. Most of those funds come from property owners along the Shattuck Avenue corridor, including Panoramic Interests, which donated $10,000, First Shattuck, which also gave $10,000, and NFLP Berkeley Center (owners of the Hotel Shattuck Plaza).

The owners of Hotel Shattuck Plaza in downtown Berkeley donated to Mayor Tom Bates’ re-election campaign

Somera-Sansome Ventures  (co-owner of 2190 Shattuck, the store housing the new Walgreen’s) Hirahara Family Partnership (owner of 2197 Shattuck, the former site of Walgreen’s), Bollibokka Shattuck, LLC, the owners of the historic Wells Fargo Bank building at 2144 Shattuck, and Martin Investments, which owns the New California Apartments at 1988 Martin Luther King (which houses Trader Joe’s) all also gave $5,000.

The anti-S campaigners raised $7,729 in the same period, including $1,500 from the ACLU of Northern California, $1,000 from the Socially Responsible Network, and individual donations of $1,000 each from two attorneys.

Measure T, which would change some of the zoning for West Berkeley, saw an influx of $21,168 from Doug Herst in support, and $9,709 in opposition, largely from small donors, but with $4,000 from the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, and $1,000 in a loan from Cathleen Quandt.

Opponents of Measure U, the so-called Sunshine Ordinance, which had raised no money before October, pulled together $10,200, including a loan of $5,000 from Leni von Blankensee and $1,000 from Councilman Gordon Wozniak. Supporters of Measure U had previously raised nearly $21,000.

The pools measures, N and O, raised $15,015 in new funds, including $5,000 from Local Union #595 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, $4,000 from the Berkeley Federation of Teachers, and $2,000 from the National California Carpenters Regional Council Issues PAC.

Related:
Ranked choice creates uncertainty in mayoral race [10.25.12]
District 2 city council race is battleground for Measure T [10.23.12]
Anderson and Belser vie for District 3 council seat [10.18.12]
Capitelli, Hahn go head to head in Berkeley’s District 5 [10.11.12]
Five Berkeley mayoral candidates face off at neighborhood forum [10.02.12]
Berkeley on course for $250,000 election [10.08.12]

Visit Berkeleyside’s Voter’s Edge Berkeley for complete coverage and tracking of the city’s 10 ballot measures. Visit Berkeleyside’s Election 2012 section to see all our coverage in the run-up to Nov. 6.

Print Friendly
Tagged , , ,
  • http://www.davosnewbies.com lknobel

    I’m not sure which finance statement you’re referring to.

  • http://www.davosnewbies.com lknobel

    Okay. I see where you’re looking. I’ll study them and try to get a new story on the raft of independent expenditures that have just been filed.

  • guest

    There have not been signs posted for any other candidate in District 5 taped to street signs or stop signs or in front of the gas station on the Alameda, or on public property like the garden triangle by the Library, in front of the track, in front of the tennis courts. I sincerely doubt that the residents across from the gas station asked for the Firefighters sign in front of their house. My neighbor didn’t request the one that appeared in front of her house and she took it down immediately. I would bet all the others in parking strips in front of houses were put their by the firefighters without asking the homeowners. They are not houses with regular Hahn signs. The homeowners probably don’t realize the parking strips belong to them, and they can take down signs placed there by others.

    There isn’t any issue right now with the firefighters, other than their upcoming negotiations. Voters can come to their own conclusions about why they are suddenly so hot to get Sophie Hahn elected.

  • anon

    Funny this sign stuff: I keep seeing torn up Kriss signs, myself.

  • guest

    JusttheFacts:
    What is shameful is lying about your opponent’s positions. Taking a strong stand on buying local and then spending less than one percent of your campaign dollars in Berkeley is hypocritical, at the least. Sophie Hahn, opposing Measure T, has repeatedly made the indefensibly false claim that Measure T “upzones all of West Berkeley,” while her website and literature support everything Measure T would actually do. That would just be puzzling if it weren’t also so dishonest. This kind of campaigning does not create fans. You shouldn’t be surprised that a lot of Berkeleyans are “partisan to her opponent,” Laurie Capitelli. Sophie Hahn has singled herself out for criticism by her own behavior, which is remarkable even by Berkeley standards, and in stark contrast to that of Council Member Capitelli. I hope he wins in a landslide.

    Berkeleyside articles, including this one, have been very balanced and factual in their reporting. This blog presents an opportunity for all sides to air their views. That is a good thing.

  • EBGuy

    I got caught up reading TUFF docs and was ensconced in the whole rent board saga with assorted PACs that I totally missed that filing yesterday. Great catch Steven.  I think your Measure T assumption is probably correct.  While I’m much more worried about the Firefighter IEC,  in the back of my mind I have to wonder about a call one of these guys gets when the council is hammering out the details of community benefits and Aquatic Park protections.   Twenty k of independent backing is nothing to sneeze at…

  • The Barracuda

    If you go here ( http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/AllFilingsByFiler.aspx?id=134217087 ), you can see that it’s the same PAC that did two separate independent expenditures – one for the Kriss billboard, the other for Rent Board. The two have nothing to do with each other.

  • anon

    Funny, most of the signs that I see torn up are Kriss signs…

  • EBGuy

    Communications by Candidate Committees for their own Election
     “Paid for by committee name” and committee ID number recommended, if possible, but not legally required.
    Per http://www.fppc.ca.gov/IPmeetings/2012/Disclaimers1-Candidate%27sOwnCampaign.pdf

  • The Sharkey

    Unfortunately I get a big fat error when I try to visit that link, but I’ll take your word for it.

    I’m not particularly happy about all the outside-of-Berkeley money being thrown around in all of our races this year either.