Blogging Bayport Alameda

August 2, 2018

Get your money

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:02 am

The first set of financial disclosures are out for the local November election. The City of Alameda has a new database to view these disclosures which you can find here.

What’s notable is who has not filed anything.  First, our resident “good government” PAC: ACT/A Better Alameda has yet to file a thing despite reporting pledges of $7000 to its PAC.  Now technically one does not have to report pledges but it *feels* as though not even trying to meet this first deadline isn’t in the spirit of their whole good government mantle.

Despite being super concerned with the impact of other special interest groups, ACT PAC/A Better Alameda’s boogeymen are all transparently disclosing that they are reserving the right to use their funds to support a ballot initiative and support candidates for elected office.

Also not on the list two of the three candidates for Mayor.  Both the incumbent and Councilmember Frank Matarrese have so far (according to the lack of filing) not raised one cent toward their campaign.  Perhaps both are counting on those special interest groups to help them out and therefore relieve them of the need to actually do any fundraising on their own.

Also not on the list are the majority of City Council candidates including Tony Daysog, who really must be counting on special interest PAC dollars to carry him through this election.  So far, Alamedans in Charge the big landlord PAC is only declaring that they will spend money in support of a ballot initiative and not for a candidate.  If they decide to stick Tony Daysog’s face on their mailers they’ll need to make some filing adjustments pretty quickly.  Unsurprisingly the same law firm that is representing Tony Daysog in his lawsuit against the City of Alameda is on Alamedans in Charge’s disclosure documents.

Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 8.51.25 PM

Anyway, here’s the list of people who have filed thus far:

Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 8.31.03 PM

Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 8.31.15 PM

Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 8.31.25 PM


  1. Last election, by far one of the biggest PACs, if not the biggest, was “Alamedans United”. It supported Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft and Malia Vella for City Council. Only about 10% or less of its incoming contributions came from Alameda addresses. Is this group reconstituting for this year’s election. I don’t see that name, or anything that looks like its replacement, on the list.

    Comment by MP — August 2, 2018 @ 6:51 am

    • by that I meant largest candidate, not ballot measure, PACs

      Comment by MP — August 2, 2018 @ 6:58 am

  2. Regarding the recent calls for the city to pay her legal bills, Vella’s filing shows contributions of approx 19M (mainly from unions) and a 20M payment for legal fees. If her contributors are paying her lawyers, why should the taxpayers?

    (Leaving aside the question of why she needed a heavy duty lawyer when she was never charged with a crime).

    Comment by dave — August 2, 2018 @ 7:27 am

    • dave, when you ask a question like that, how I can be sure that you do not come from “a disgusting, misogynistic, and sexist underbelly in our beloved community” ?

      Comment by MP — August 2, 2018 @ 7:55 am

    • Because if she didn’t fundraise to help pay off her bills then it would have to come out of her pocket. Is that the expectation now from anyone interested in public service? That they have the means to fend off all legal challenges no matter how flimsy of a case it may stand on? That money that could go to an actual campaign has to go to legal fees instead? Is that how we keep political opponents from mounting a challenge? Inundate them with legal fees so that they don’t have the ability to run for office?

      Perhaps there are other repercussions in her work related life as a result of this whole business that had to be addressed as well. Perhaps because despite not being charged with a crime folks are more interested in guilty until proven innocent. Because having a lawyer is never proof of guilt.

      Comment by Lauren Do — August 2, 2018 @ 9:08 am

      • We know she’s innocent, she told us so, why such heavy legal bills when all she had to do was answer a few questions.

        In my line of work I face inquiries from regulators frequently. They are important and sensitive, but they aren’t difficult and don’t require counsel. I just answer the questions truthfully and move on. It’s hard to see why she didn’t do same, especially given her obvious innocence, and even harder to see why the citizens should pay, given the obvious support of her benefactors.

        Comment by dave — August 2, 2018 @ 9:25 am

        • Twenty MILLION in legal fees, dave? On Vella’s filed disclosure statement, it says $20K. Think you hit the wrong key?

          Comment by vigi — August 2, 2018 @ 9:41 am

        • Professional habit. In finance, M is thousand, MM is million.

          Comment by dave — August 2, 2018 @ 9:44 am

        • wait a minute, dave, first, you answer questions (why not just decline to participate, like several people, apparently?) and, second, you do so without a lawyer sitting in even though you are not a member of the bar or a professor of government ethics, or both, yourself? I don’t believe you.

          Comment by MP — August 2, 2018 @ 9:48 am

        • Marriage isn’t a guarantee of anything either, and people probably don’t enter it budgeting the price of a contested divorce…which in my experience is way more than Vella’s legal fees to date. Isn’t Vella paid as both a Teamster attorney and an “assistant professor of practice” of ethics at Mills College? I wouldn’t waste much ink bemoaning the depth of her “pockets”. I seriously doubt either of those jobs were jeopardized by this affair,

          How much were Lena Tam’s attorney fees again? Per Transparent California, Lena Tam is the third highest paid employee at EBMUD, total pay and benefits currently $306,652.

          If you are so worried about people not being able to afford the cost of running for and being in office, why in hell aren’t you, Lauren Do, supporting Tony and Trish? After all, Trish is a woman of color and Tony [Japanese-Filipino] is virtually the same mixed Asian Pacific islander type as Malia. I doubt they have comparable resources.

          Lauren Do, your track record on this blog is one of supporting the wealthiest candidates for office, not those who need the taxpayer to foot their legal bills. I wish you would stop pretending you root for the underdog.

          It seems to me that perhaps the more wealthy the office-holder, the more likely they are to abuse official power. You know–Like Trump, Mnuchin, Tom Price, et al

          Comment by vigi — August 2, 2018 @ 11:29 am

      • How many non-sequiturs can you pack into one reply, vigi?

        Comment by BC — August 2, 2018 @ 11:58 am

  3. It would be so much easier for all of us if Tony Daysog would just quietly fade away and stop trying to make us pretend he is a politician willing to take a stand instead of just talking too much…

    Comment by Jon Spangler — August 2, 2018 @ 8:05 am

    • Agreed.

      Comment by Jake — August 2, 2018 @ 8:17 am

    • — “just talking too much…”

      Be careful with that one. It applies to some incumbent candidates as well.

      Comment by MP — August 2, 2018 @ 8:33 am

      • yes but Tony is the “GRAND’DADDY” of all the talkers who have ever graced a seat on that podium. Also he is the only person to sit up there with a weather vain by his side.

        Comment by JohnP.TrumpisnotmyPresident. — August 2, 2018 @ 2:57 pm

        • JohnP., you obviously haven’t watched many recent Council meetings if you are ranking Tony D so highly.

          Comment by MP — August 2, 2018 @ 5:16 pm

  4. vane,?

    Comment by JohnP.TrumpisnotmyPresident. — August 2, 2018 @ 2:58 pm

  5. Not sure which is worse, talking a lot during discussion or repeating questions when they have been answered multiple times and the answer was in the packet provided before the meeting, anyway. I think the latter is much more time wasting and annoying. We need to set a time for q and a on each agenda item and stick to it.

    Comment by Kate Quick — August 2, 2018 @ 7:16 pm

  6. Still a work in progress but I am working on a one stop place to get a quick view of monies raised as well as links to the FPPC documents should you be interested in looking at particular contributions and/or expenditures.

    Comment by Mike McMahon — August 2, 2018 @ 10:55 pm

    • Nice webpage. I will bookmark it.

      Comment by MP — August 3, 2018 @ 12:35 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at