• CREATE AN ACCOUNT
  • LOG.IN
  • CONTENTS
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • ARCHIVE
  • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US

  • Home
  • News
    • News Main Page
    • NewsFlash
  • A&E
    • A&E Main Page
    • Movie Times
    • TV Listings
    • A&E Blog
    • Art Galleries
    • Best Bets
  • Opinion
    • Opinion Main Page
    • Endorsements
    • Blogs
    • Columns
    • Voices
    • Letters
    • In Memoriam
    • Obituaries
  • Events
    • Today
    • Search
    • Submit
    • Best Bets
  • Living
    • Living Main Page
    • Outdoors
    • Travel
    • Sports
    • Peeps
  • Food & Drink
    • Food & Drink Main Page
    • All Restaurants
    • Delivery
    • All Bars & Clubs
    • Drink Specials
    • Open Now
  • Sports
  • Outdoors
    • Outdoors Main Page
    • Outside Insider
    • Spotlight On
    • Features
  • Classifieds
    • Real Estate
    • Jobs
    • Autos
  • Obits

    Santa Barbara City Elections Drowning in Cash

    Texas Billionaire Spends Half a Million to Change Council


    Friday, October 23, 2009
    By Nick Welsh (Contact)
    Article Tools
    Print friendly
    E-mail story
    Tip Us Off
    iPod friendly
    Comments
    Bookmark This
    del.icio.us. del.icio.us.
    Digg! Digg!
    furl furl
    google google
    newsvine newsvine
    reddit reddit
    technorati technorati
    Facebook Facebook
    Yahoo! My Web 2.0 Yahoo!

    If money is the mother’s milk of politics, then Santa Barbara voters should be drowning in it by now. Spending on the mayoral and council races has achieved new, stratospheric heights, and with two weeks to go before ballots are counted, the fund-raising promises only to get wilder.

    In a normal year, the $60,000 that has been raised by Firefighters for Better Government on behalf of their slate of candidates — Helene Schneider for mayor and Grant House, Bendy White, and Dianne Channing for council — would seem like a lot. But the 2009 elections are anything but normal. Just one person, Texas billionaire and part-time Montecito resident Randall Van Wolfswinkel, has spent $520,000 to back Measure B, the initiative that would lower maximum building heights by one third; as well as his slate of conservative candidates: Dale Francisco for mayor, and Frank Hotchkiss, Michael Self, and Cathie McCammon for council.

    These sums are unprecedented by Santa Barbara standards. According to campaign finance statements released late this week, Van Wolfswinkel’s political action committee (PAC), called Preserve Our Santa Barbara, spent $518,000. Of that, Van Wolfswinkel donated or loaned the PAC $468,000. And those sums do not count the $60,000 Van Wolfswinkel donated to his candidates and Measure B directly, in his own name.

    According to the most recent reports, Van Wolfswinkel spent $120,000 on negative advertisements to defeat the slate backed by the Democratic Party: Schneider, House, Channing, and White. By contrast, he spent slightly less — $111,800 — on behalf of the candidates he’s backed. He spent $49,500 on behalf of Measure B, and another $40,000 on a mailer titled, “Official Non-partisan Voter Guide” that appeared as if it had been endorsed by the League of Women Voters, but wasn’t. The guide supported the Van Wolfswinkel slate. Members of the League have strenuously objected, but to little effect.

    With the exception of one cursory interview with Daily Sound columnist Cheri Rae, Van Wolfswinkel has declined requests for media interviews. According to political folklore, he is a quiet, diffident man who cares passionately about preserving Santa Barbara, where he grew up. Van Wolfswinkel started First Texas Homes, one of the largest real estate developers in the nation, and lives outside Dallas. He reportedly owns a property in Montecito and is shopping around for another on which he can build a new house for his family. He got involved with Santa Barbara politics after the Santa Barbara City Council denied an appeal he financed to block the demolition of the Union 76 gas station on Coast Village Road and its replacement by a three-story mix of condos and shops. He reportedly decided then that members of the City Council needed to be replaced.

    By various accounts, Van Wolfswinkel is a politically conservative Republican, and while not all members of his slate are Republican, they are the most conservative candidates with a likely chance of victory.

    The magnitude of Van Wolfswinkel’s donations have eclipsed the $50,000 check written by Russian billionaire banker Sergey Grishin to mayoral candidate Steve Cushman. Grishin owns properties in Montecito, including the Val Verde estate, and, like Van Wolfswinkel, is reportedly planning to settle down in the area. Normally, a donation of that size would be the buzz of the campaign. But with so much cash flying around, the Grishin donation hasn’t caused the stir it ordinarily would. It has been the subject, however, of some hit-pieces paid for by Van Wolfswikel.

    Of the mayoral candidates, Helene Schneider — backed by the Democratic Party, all the public employee unions, and many liberal, progressive, and environmental organizations — reported the largest amount of campaign cash, $138,000. Of that, $10,000 came from the Police Officers Association, $8,500 from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and $5,000 from the Firefighters for Better Government. Publisher-philanthropist Sara Miller-McCune donated $5,000, Betty Stephens — a major Democratic donor — $4,500, and 1st District Supervisor Salud Carbajal $3,000.

    Chamber of Commerce chief Steve Cushman raised $128,000 for his mayoral bid, $4,000 of that from art gallery and restaurant owner Frank Goss, $2,000 from retired investment manager Steven Hammer, and $3,000 from real estate player Steve Epstein. Attorneys and longtime Cushman friends Rob and Judy Egenolf gave $5,000 in the form of in-kind services.

    By contrast, Councilmember Dale Francisco, who jumped into the mayoral race late, has raised $83,000. He loaned himself $30,000 of that. Jim and Sharon Westby donated $5,100. Westby, a retired General Motors executive, urged Francisco to run for mayor, and has acted as a political coach and strategist for the slate. Westby, Self, and Francisco cut their teeth together politically, opposing the roundabouts and bulb-outs installed on the upper Eastside as a way to slow down traffic. They’ve contended that the traffic-calming devices are part of a broader hidden agenda by city traffic engineers, new urbanists, and alternative transportation advocates to force motorists out of their cars. With Van Wolfswinkel’s money in the race paying for Preserve Our Santa Barbara's ads supporting Francisco and attacking his rivals, Francisco has less urgency to match his rivals in campaign donations. Francisco has taken pains, however, to stress that he’s not taken a cent from Van Wolfswinkel and insists that there’s no cooperation or coordination between the two campaigns.

    Mayoral candidates Isaac Garrett and Bob Hansen have not spent enough to trigger campaign reporting requirements.

    Of the 13 City Council candidates, real estate entrepreneur John Thyne raised $95,000 — itself unheard of in a race for a post that pays only $35,000 a year. Of that, the largest donation — $10,000 — came from CU Enterprises, a client of Thyne’s, which manufactures parts for the Department of Defense and other government agencies. Thyne also got $2,000 from Tony Romasanta, a major real estate owner along the waterfront.

    Following in a distant but respectable second place was Councilmember Grant House, the only incumbent in the race, who reported $76,000 in campaign donations. Of those, SEIU’s was the biggest, at $11,500. Environmentalist Peter Sperling, of Call Wave and the University of Phoenix fortune, donated $7,000, Supervisor Carbajal $6,000 and Russell

    Trenholme $5,000. [I mistakenly identified Trenholme as a developer in the initial version of this piece. In fact, Trenholme is a retired philosophy professor and former optical chain store owner from the Midwest, who has resided in Montecito since 2000. Trenholme said he has never been a developer or in any aspect of the construction industry. He has been politically active with PUEBLO and regards the circumstances under which undocumented workers live in the United States as “one of the great human rights issues of the day.” Trenholme said he donated to House because he thought House shared some of his concerns about undocumented workers.-N.W.] PUEBLO reported $3,500 in in-kind donations, and the Engineers Union donated $4,500 worth of in-kind services.

    Land use consultant and Planning Commissioner Harwood “Bendy” White reported $56,816, with developer and homeless advocate Chuck Blitz donating $2,000, Carbajal $1,500, and developer-attorney Tony Romasanta giving $1,000.

    Dianne Channing — part of the Democratic Party slate — reported $47,000 in donations. Of those, she loaned herself $7,000, received $5,000 from the SEIU, $3,000 from the Police Officers Association, and $3,000 from the firefighters union.

    Frank Hotchkiss, now making his second bid for council, raised $41,000; of that Van Wolfswinkel donated $7,000 and the police union contributed $5,000.

    Michael Self reported $37,154, of which $10,000 came from Van Wolfswinkel and $5,200 she loaned herself.

    David Pritchett — a member of the Transporation and Circulation Committee and not part of any slate — raised $36,000, half of which came in the form of in-kind donations. Cal Trout gave Pritchett, a creek restoration advocate, $500, and Planning Commissioner Charmaine Jacobs donated $250.

    Finally, Justin Tevis — the most outspokenly Live-Free-or-Die conservative in the race — raised $20,000. Half of that was in the form of in-kind donations. Most of the rest came from donors in the Santa Ynez Valley, where Tevis — at 26, the youngest candidate in the race — grew up.

    Save El Pueblo Viejo — which is leading the charge on behalf of Measure B — raised $75,000. Of that, $33,000 came from Van Wolfswinkel personally rather than his PAC.

    Opponents of Measure B — the No on B Committee — raised $87,000. The largest donor was Victoria Street Partners, which gave $10,000 and which hopes to build a mixed-use development where the closed Vons is on Victoria Street. Bruce Corwin, owner of Metropolitan Theatres, gave $5,000. Corwin is a partner in major developments plans proposed for the back of the Arlington Theatre, which Metro Theatres owns. Sara Miller-McCune donated $5,000 to the No on B campaign, as did Virginia Hunter, who owns waterfront real estate by the foot of State Street, and developer-banker Michel Towbes. The National Association of Realtors donated $10,000 to conduct a survey. That survey — which was denounced by supporters of Measure B as a manipulative and propagandistic “push poll” — showed Measure B lacks the tsunami of support that most everyone assumes it has. The survey claimed that Measure B actually would lose if voters were exposed to arguments against it.

    This story has been amended since its original posting. Russell Tenholme, who donated to House's campaign, was originally identified as a developer, but says he is not.

    Story Help (Click-ability)
    Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

    Comments

    Discussion Guidelines

    Vote for no measure or candidate backed or supported by Randall "The Vandal" Van Wolfswinkel.

    It's that simple.
    Remember Michael Huffington and his ilk.

    Keep your money out of Santa Barbara politics, Twinklewinkel!

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 2 of 4 • Thumbs Down: 2 of 4

    Draxor (anonymous profile)
    October 23, 2009 at 8:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    This eye popping, outrageous and corrupt $520,000 donation to advertise one single persons political slate is precedent setting. This really puts the average voter at a disadvantage. The U.S. conservative Supreme Court has upheld these large contributions constitutional and are considered "freedom of speech." So the only way to keep the individual wealthy contributors in check is for every fair minded voter to understand the dangers and disadvantage the minions have in this pay for play democracy. So let us put a stop to it at the ballot box and reject Van Wolfswinkel's slate and positions.

    This is one of those periodic stealthy and divisive conservative, probably ultra-conservative campagin. As Democrats are off-guard due to recent wins at the federal level, Republicans, who have screwed up at the federal level and negatively affecting us all, still have money to burn, have regrouped and are focusing their attention on local campaigns. As the Democratic leadership at the national level lead a national recovery that translates into local rebounds, the stealthy Republicans at the local level take credit for it. It's a sick cycle. Let's break the cycle and for democracy's sake reject every recommendation by Van Wolfswinkel.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 3 of 4 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 4

    DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
    October 23, 2009 at 10:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Dear Don, Who do you think Van Wolfswinkel wants in office. Remember, he's a developer and not as dumb as you may think.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 2 of 2 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 2

    Georgy (anonymous profile)
    October 23, 2009 at 10:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    I dont like Van Wolfswinkels cash coming into this race, but I also dont appreciate union cash from those who council members have to approve raises for. Its been the unions for years who wielded the cash and now we have some part time resident from Texas doing it the system is broken we need campaign finance reform.

    Don Mcdermott has no credibility he is like Mccarthy during the Red Scare except instead of Communists he see Republicans under every bedsheet. Get some perspective Don the endless conspiracy theory wears thin.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 1 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 1

    pointssouth (anonymous profile)
    October 23, 2009 at 10:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    PS I also think district elections would be healthy as well

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 1 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 1

    pointssouth (anonymous profile)
    October 23, 2009 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    For over 20 years Santa Barbara has been run by Political Machine. From Washington DC, Sacramento, to Santa Barbara County and City chambers. The machine is so powerful they can get someone elected to office with no qualifications. Janet Wolfe's rise from School Board to Supervisor was primarily due to the machines backing. The Police and Fire Union's support the machine, guaranteeing themselves raises and pensions. Want to know which candidates the machine's backing. Just look for the commercials with Lois Capps.
    The only way to break this machine is to match their power, and that's what former Santa Barbara resident Van Wolfswinkel is doing.
    For to many years voices of reason have been drowned out by the machine and their own agenda. This is not representational government. The machine's main purpose is to stay in power. That's why the loud complaints about the money being spent.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 2 • Thumbs Down: 2 of 2

    CManSB (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 1:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    I trust Santa Barbara voters. The people who vote in an off year election like this are smarter and more informed than the people running these campaigns. We are unique in that regard. Statewide, nationwide the campaign approach that the voters are dummies and propaganda works is not valid here. Probably only 20,000 residents will vote and at least half will be university grads who actually know something about local politics and what they hope their vote will achieve. I think the Van Wolfswinkel participation and all the rest is healthy, let's see what happens. He went to SBHS! That gives him all the cred he needs in my book to participate. He is interested in coming home with his family one day. Give him a break. No one is forcing you to vote his way. My prediction: Schneider for Mayor; White on Council and then very close for the other three seats between Channing, Self, McCammon, House and Pritchett.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 1 of 2 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 2

    sbreader (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 6:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    It takes VanW's kind of money to outshout the overbearing left wing in this town with its roots in the SDS and 1960's-style drown-out-argument-with-screaming kind of campaigning (funny how those types get upset when met with similar tactics, eg during the health care debates). There is nothing corrupt about making a large campaign contribution or spending one's own funds to push a political agenda.

    The McDermotts' of the world are simply upset that someone is standing up to the big-spending, heavy-taxing, union-placating, self-aggrandizing Democratic political machine. Jeez, Don, anyone who is the least bit to the right of the far left is evil? Get a grip.

    And BTW, much as everyone wants to label VanW as a Texas billionaire, he is actually a SB native. One might suspect he is one of those intelligent rich people who makes their permanent residence elsewhere so as to prevent the Peoples' Republic of CA from taxing them to death - a natural response to the tax the rich mentality here.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 1

    JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    One person has provided three-fourths of the money to promote Measure B.

    Look at the Oct. 22 campaign reports for Save El Pueblo Viejo and for Preserve Our Santa Barbara and you'll see. SEPV raised $63,689 in 2009, of which $33,450 came from one donor. POSB spent $49,507 to promote Measure B, and nearly all of POSB's money comes from that same individual.

    Do the math, and VOILA -- 74% of the Measure B support comes from one person.

    So much for the myth that Measure B has broad community support!!

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 2 of 2 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 2

    ForYourConsideration (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 12:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Judging from all the flyers showing up in my mailbox, developer Van Wolfswinkel is getting more for his $518,000 than the average Santa Barbara condo buyer

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 1 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 1

    EastBeach (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    "The machine is so powerful they can get someone elected to office with no qualifications. Janet Wolfe's rise from School Board to Supervisor was primarily due to the machines backing ..."
    -- CManSB --

    So what are the proper qualifications then?

    Do Hotchkiss (a former actor turned real estate agent) and Self (an anti-traffic calming device zealot) posses those qualifications?

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 2 of 2 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 2

    EastBeach (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Since when are any "qualifications" other than sucking up to unions and promising to spend money on left wing causes needed in order to be elected in SB? Francisco is an obvious exception and his election may hopefully mean that the electorate here is finally seeing a bit more of a middle view - at least those who have to pay for all this largesse.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 1 of 2 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 2

    JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    the votes are going through the postal service's business reply center. there could be a thousand envelopes stuck in the system that wont get delivered until after the third of november.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    indyreader65 (anonymous profile)
    October 24, 2009 at 6:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Gregory; I don't recall ever suggesting the Van Wolfswinkel is "dumb." Perhaps you are confused because I have stated that his Mayoral pick Dale Francisco is stupid in his logic by stating that because he has worked for a few years in a large organization that he is uniquely qualified to represent in a democratic body of government.

    Dale Francisco has only recently revealed that he has met with Van Wolfswinkel several times. I imagine Van Wolfswinkel has met with all of his picks. I have no idea what was discussed and what criteria or qualifications this Van Wolfswinkel committee of one has.

    Some here complain about California's political problems but VanWolfswinkel is steeped in Texas Politics, the incubator of regressive and corrupt policies that have not only resulted in many negative results for it's own inhabitants but the entire nation. Please research George W. Bush and our current recession for a relative connection to our current local economy.

    Supposed "conservative" Texas politics resulted in negative affect here in California as well. Please research the origin of California's Texas spawned energy crisis of the late 1990's as an example. Hapless Governor Gray Davis was the intentional fall guy for for very corrupt Texan corporate behavior.

    My main point about Van Wolfswinkel's campagin to install a slate is that it is unprecedented and it is not democracy. Again, the only way to control this corporate style takeover of our local body of government by an someone that doesn't even live here is to reject his recommendations at the ballot box.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 1 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 1

    DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
    October 25, 2009 at 7:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    Not a democracy, Don? How so? VanW's money is being used to force people to vote his way? Not much confidence in the voters, huh? And I knew that sooner or later you would link this to Bush. Paranoid much?

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 1

    JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
    October 25, 2009 at 5:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    "If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to." — Dorothy Parker

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 1

    infomaniac (anonymous profile)
    October 26, 2009 at 8:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    I've had words with Ms. Parker about Arguing By Selective Observation.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 1

    God (anonymous profile)
    October 26, 2009 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    I've already voted, so what's his name's money isn't buying my vote.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    CharityBee (anonymous profile)
    October 26, 2009 at 2:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Post a comment

    Username:
    Password: (Forgotten your password?)

    Comment:

    EVENT CALENDAR

    Previous Month | Next Month

    Today's Events Best Bets Submit an Event

    Local Weather

    Currently:
    Clear Sky
    Temperature:
    54.0°
    Wind:
    6 W

    Surf Report
    • Specials
    • InPrint
    • Top Emails
    • Best Of 2009
    • 2009 Election Coverage
    • Wedding Guide 2009
    • Blue Green Guide 2009
    • SBIFF 2009
    • Tea Fire 2008
    • Local Heroes 2008
    • Calendar of Fundraisers
    • Local Bands
    • High Noon in the Garden of Controversy
    • CAMA Presents the Shanghai Symphony
    • Elings Park Expansion Shot Down
    • Before I Be Your Dog …
    • Flobots Return with New Record, New Vision
    • Autism Attacked Alternatively
    1. Eating Animals
    2. Montecito Pet Shop to Sell Only Rescued Dogs
    3. Producer Must Pay Landscaper
    4. Nothing to Hide Anymore
    5. Teacher in Trouble
    6. Gardens of Rare Books
    • CREATE AN ACCOUNT
    • LOG.IN
    • CONTENTS
    • CLASSIFIEDS
    • ARCHIVE
    • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US
    Google
     
    Independent.com Web
    Copyright ©2009 Santa Barbara Independent, Inc. Reproduction of material from any Independent.com pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. If you believe an Independent.com user or any material appearing on Independent.com is copyrighted material used without proper permission, please click here.
    This is our Privacy Policy.