Ann Arbor Campaign Finance 2013
Candidates in Ann Arbor city council races have so far raised a combined total of more than $50,000 in contributions for the general election to be held on Nov. 5, 2013. The $20,875 raised by Ward 2 independent incumbent Jane Lumm made her total about twice as much as any other candidate. That included Ward 2 Democratic challenger Kirk Westphal, who raised $10,103 during the pre-election campaign period, which ended Oct. 20.
Dots correspond to addresses that made contributions to Ann Arbor city council candidates for the Nov. 5, 2013 election.
Lumm’s fundraising effort during the pre-election phase exceeded her total from 2011 when she contested the general election with incumbent Democrat Stephen Rapundalo. That year she raised $18,950 from 193 donors.
The third Ward 2 candidate, Conrad Brown, filed a reporting waiver, which is allowed if a candidate does not expect to raise more than $1,000.
Ward 1 incumbent Democrat Sabra Briere raised $11,800 in a race where she’s challenged by independent Jeff Hayner, who has raised $2,680 so far.
In Ward 3, incumbent Democrat Stephen Kunselman, who survived a tough primary race with Julie Grand, did not raise any additional money during this most recent filing period. Kunselman’s independent challenger Sam DeVarti raised $945.
In Ward 5, Mike Anglin does not have an opponent on the ballot, but raised $4,299 in this most recent period. He’s spent $1,340 of that. In addition to Thomas Partridge, who declared his write-in candidacy much earlier in the year, Charles “Chip” Smith has just recently filed his paperwork to declare a write-in candidacy for the Ward 5 seat that’s up for election this year. Responding to an emailed query, Smith said he will try to keep his expenditures under the reporting-waiver limit of $1,000.
In Ward 4, Jack Eaton does not face any opponents on Nov. 5 on the ballot or as write-ins, but does have a write-in opponent in William Lockwood. Eaton won the Democratic primary against incumbent Democrat Marcia Higgins.
The Ann Arbor city council includes a total of 11 members – two from each of the city’s five wards and the mayor. All city council positions are elected for two-year terms, with one of the wards’s seats up for election every year. The position of mayor is elected in even years, so not this year.
The filings, which were due on Oct. 25, are available through the Washtenaw County clerk’s searchable campaign finance database. Charts and maps by The Chronicle are presented after the jump.
Charts
A pattern for winning city council campaigns over the last few election cycles has been a skew toward more numerous but lower dollar amount contributions. For this pre-election period, Mike Anglin in Ward 5 had the lowest average at $64 per donor, with Kirk Westphal in Ward 2 coming in at $133 – or more than double Anglin’s average.
Jeff Hayner: Contributions to 2013 Ward 1 city council campaign. Hayner has raised $2,680, averaging $96 per donor, with a median of $50 for 28 donors. He’s spent $841 so far.
Sabra Briere: Contributions to 2013 Ward 1 city council campaign. Briere raised a total of $11,800, averaging $118 per donor and a median of $100 among 100 donors. So far she’s spent $6,864 including $1,000 for Brad O’Connor as a campaign manager. O’Connor managed Carol Kuhnke’s successful 22nd circuit court judge campaign as well as Adam Zemke’s 55th District state representative campaign.
Jane Lumm: Contributions to 2013 Ward 2 city council campaign. Lumm raised $20,875, averaging $102 per donor, with a median of $100 for 204 donors. She has spent $11,664 so far.
Kirk Westphal: Contributions to 2013 Ward 2 city council campaign. Westphal raised $10,103, averaging $133 per donor with a median of $100 among 76 donors. He has spent $4,614 so far.
Mike Anglin: Contributions to 2013 Ward 2 city council campaign. Anglin has raised $4,299, averaging $64 per donor with a median of $50 among 67 donors. He has spent $1,340 so far.
Maps
The 2013 general election filings continue the trend of Ann Arbor city council candidates showing considerable citywide support, in addition to having support in their own wards.
Jeff Hayner: Yellow dots correspond to addresses making contributions to his 2013 Ward 1 campaign.
Sabra Briere: Black dots correspond to addresses making contributions to her 2013 Ward 1 campaign.
Jane Lumm: Green dots correspond to addresses making contributions to her 2013 Ward 2 campaign.
Kirk Westphal: Purple dots correspond to addresses making contributions to his 2013 Ward 2 campaign.
Mike Anglin: Red dots correspond to addresses making contributions to his 2013 Ward 5 campaign.
The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!
Thank you for avoiding the temptation to characterize the donors to each campaign. I have grown weary of the instant response that some have in pointing at certain donors and speculating about both the donor’s motivation and the candidate’s likely bias because of this.
Having said that, I’ll point out that Sabra Briere’s donor list is quite wide-ranging, including people from different political “sides”. I have recently written [link] about the new definition of partisanship in Ann Arbor. (I’ve abandoned the “Council Party” tag because it doesn’t seem quite to fit any more.) Briere’s donors reflect (in my opinion, and I am one of them) her long presence in the community and in Ann Arbor politics.
Hayner only has two First Ward contributors outside his own Pontiac Trail neighborhood.
To get an idea of the type of support – and consequently the possible expectations placed on a council member — you really have to look at the filings on the Washtenaw County website. It paints a rich and valuable picture of the type of campaign that is being run.
The list of contributors in the filling helps you get a clear idea of whether the candidate is running a neighborhood-oriented grassroots campaign, or one with broad cross-party support. When you recognize the names and look at the occupations of the donors, you can determine whether that campaign is one that is beholden to developers, special interests, and traditional party politics.
Jeff is right. I can’t add anything to what Vivienne said about Sabra’s support.
With regard to the Second Ward, the list of contributors tells the tale. Westphal’s people include a lot of the leftover fragments of the Council Party. Lumm’s list includes a wide variety of “neighborhoodies” across the city, and goes beyond traditional party politics.
Since votes generally (but not always) wind up in agreement with how much money the candidates have raised, it looks like Lumm is going to crush Westphal. We certainly don’t need someone on Council who will always side with the developers and encourage the grandiosity and wretched excess of the Hieftje years.
I wonder why there’s no mention of an A2Indy.com advertisement on CM Lumm’s statement when there is one on Hayner’s. I know there are ads running for both. I wonder what the fair market value is for that. If given to them by A2Indy.com, it legally needs to be listed as such as an in-kind donation (though companies cannot donate to individual candidates according to MI Campaign Finance Law), as I understand it.
I join Jeremy in saying that the fair-market value of these ads should be listed as an in-kind contribution by A2Indy.com. Hayner reported an expenditure of $1 for his ads. Either their fair-market value is only $1 (hard to believe) or the contribution must be reported.
Corporations may not contribute. The “whois” for a2Indy.com lists Patricia Lesko as the registrant, without an organization attached. So she should list her in-kind contribution if the value of Hayner’s ad is greater than $1.
So Dave, what value do you place on the A2Indy ad? Please advise.
I think it would be at least a couple of hundred dollars. While A2Indy.com is new, all of the readers of A2Politico.com are being automatically sent there.
Newspapers and magazines may charge what they like (or what the market will bear) for ad space sold. There is no fair market value for ad space. Publications may charge different classes of advertisers different rates. Publications may go off of their rate cards (charge less than the advertised rate) and do so regularly for a variety of reasons. That being said, The Ann Arbor Independent gives free print and banner ads to small local businesses and non-profits. This election season, I decided to sell $1 ads to political candidates. All candidates had the opportunity to call up and ask to advertise in the October 29th issue. Not all candidates did so, obviously. The candidates were billed. If they don’t pay, I know where they live.
I received this email soliciting for an advertisement:
“Our publishing company is launching a locally owned weekly newspaper called The Ann Arbor Independent. The first issue of the newspaper will be distributed October 29th. We would like to offer your campaign a print ad for $1. Advertising for locally owned businesses and non-profits is free.”
In discussing the ‘fair-market value’ of an ad – this from their website:
“The site accepts advertisements from locally-owned businesses, small non-
profit organizations, citizen groups, arts organizations and other similar non-
governmental entities free of charge.”
We could go through a discussion of circulation, readership and the like, but that is moot; the fair market value is what I or others in the market (at that time) would be asked to pay, and that was One Dollar. I bought one, and I reported the expense as required.
Were all candidates sent that same email soliciting the advertisement?
If I were to pay $3.00 to A2Indy.com, would I be able to pick text and have A2Indy design online ads for Briere, Kirk Westphal, and Chip Smith on their behalf?
I could do that as an in-kind contribution to each, but I guess all that’s beside the point.
I only point it out because I’ve done campaign finance previously and the rules exist so that all candidates for public office play fair and by the rules. I thought something smelled fishy, which was why I brought it up. I care deeply about the sanctity of the electoral process, and rules preventing corporate influence of candidate committees are important to me.
I had the opportunity to chat about this and other items for about an hour with Mr Hayner today (and we do actually see eye to eye on a few things, I’ll say – as my updated endorsement page on my blog states), and he explained exactly what he’s posted above – the policy wasn’t immediately clear regarding ads for political candidates, which was what made me wonder.
This all being said, unless I missed it, I haven’t seen the expense on CM Lumm’s statement. A $1.00 expense is still an expense (or debt / liability), and still must be reported on the CFR.