Backers of Pulte Home’s Measure S campaign spent more than
$658,000
In what may be a case of David vs. Goliath, the No-on-S campaign
people have quite an uphill battle on their hands as they attempt
to take on a political warhorse that has already spent upwards of
$660,000. In contrast the No-on-S campaign has barely generated
$700.
As of Sept. 30, the Yes-on-S campaign raised $472,777.44, but
spent $658,291.69, arguably the most money ever spent in San Benito
County on an initiative.
Backers of Pulte Home’s Measure S campaign spent more than $658,000
In what may be a case of David vs. Goliath, the No-on-S campaign people have quite an uphill battle on their hands as they attempt to take on a political warhorse that has already spent upwards of $660,000. In contrast the No-on-S campaign has barely generated $700.
As of Sept. 30, the Yes-on-S campaign raised $472,777.44, but spent $658,291.69, arguably the most money ever spent in San Benito County on an initiative.
Most interesting about the election’s Form 460 report for the Yes-on-S campaign is the fact that 90 percent of the $658,291.69 spent by the campaign was spent outside San Benito County. The largest chunk of money was paid to campaign consultants.
Political Science professor Matt Escover believed this was the most ever spent on a ballot measure in San Benito County.
“That’s the understatement of the year. There are a few campaigns that spend $1,000 for this and that, but $10,000 is the most I’d ever seen spent on a candidate. $600,000 is amazing. I’ve been in politics since 1987 and I’ve never heard of that kind of money being spent locally. I’d venture to say that they wouldn’t invest that amount of money if they weren’t sure they could make the development work,” Escover said.
Gordon Machado, who is heading the anti Measure S campaign said that his organization would love to be able to compete with Yes-on-S, but they haven’t got the funds.
“You can paint a beautiful picture if you can hire a good artist, but we can’t afford to do it,” Machado said. “It’s disheartening, that’s for sure. We worked it out the other day and when everything is said and done Del Webb will have spent $60 per voter.”
Annette Giacomazzi disputed that 90 percent of Pulte’s money had been spent outside of San Benito County, but added that since Pulte/Del Webb already had lawyers for their corporation they used the company they usually do business with. They also already had videographers in place and the polling company they have partnered with for many years, recommended the political consultants based out of San Francisco.
“We have spent a lot of money, but Pulte Del Webb is a professional marketing company and they do everything first class, including master planned communities and that takes money,” Giacomazzi said. “Putting it into perspective in a supervisoral campaign in Placer County spent $1 million.
Giacomazzi also led the No-on-G campaign two years ago and she denied the claim that Yes-on-S is the most expensive ballot measure the county has ever seen. She said that the No-on-G campaign spent $700,000. However it is the most expensive measure the city has ever seen.
Measure S will amend the city’s general plan and re-designate 1300 acres of agricultural land as mixed-use residential. Once the moratorium is lifted their land would be exempt from the 244-unit annual limit on residential allocation’s imposed by Measure U; so Del Webb could be issued as many as 650 permits per year.
Several interesting ironies are contained within Pulte’s spending document including that the campaign’s largest donors is the owner of the property Del Webb hopes to develop on, Ken Gimelli, who has donated $250,000 to date.
Also of interest is the fact that one of the people on Del Webb’s payroll is a councilman from the city of Lincoln, who had previously come forward at several presentations and praised the work Del Webb had done at their Sun City Lincoln Hills development.
“This is more than we typically spend on a project, because the normal course of action is to meet with elected officials and city staff, so the election is an extra step over and above any expenses they need incur,” Giacomazzi said.
Currently there are 14,666 registered voters within the city limits. In the event that everyone who is registered, votes, that means that Del Webb will have spent $44.89 per voter.
