Elections

PACs Indy Spending Tops $262,000

Another $68,000 dumped into campaigns
in last three days to back favored candidates

by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2014
Posted Monday November 3, 2014 1:40pm

Local political action committees (PACs) have already spent more than a quarter-million dollars trying to influence the outcome of the mayor and City Council elections set for Tuesday November 4.

For the pick of the big-money PACs look no further than District 10 candidate Robert Thomas. He has garnered nearly $60,000 in independent expenditures, so far, including a whopping $50,000 from the Austin Board of Realtors—a sum that far exceeds the total amount of independent expenditures made on behalf of any other candidate. The rest of support for Thomas came from the Austin Firefighters Association, Austin Police Association, and some free billboards courtesy of Reagan National Advertising.

Total independent expenditures jumped almost $68,000 in just the last three days of reporting as PACs chipped in to push last-minute ads, mailers, phone banks and block walkers aimed at getting preferred candidates elected. Of if not elected outright, at least getting them into a runoff where independent expenditures may be even more effective in influencing who serves as the new mayor and fills 10 council seats.

While amounts already spent are significant and might make a difference in the outcome of the general election, these PACs are sitting on more than $800,000 that can be deployed to influence voters in the seven weeks of campaigning to come, after the November 4 general election and before the December 16 runoffs.

Independent expenditures are monies spent for electioneering communication or express advocacy to support or oppose a candidate without consulting with a candidate’s campaign.

Political consultant Peck Young is advising a number of council candidates in this election, some of which have gotten support through independent expenditures.

“As long as you have ridiculously low limits on campaign contributions you need some mechanism to support candidates and that's what these independent expenditures are for,” Young said. “Until we get rational contribution levels these independent expenditures are it.”

Gallo ‘Statesman’ Ads Missing Disclosures

Wednesday ad and newspaper wrappers
both failed to include required statements

by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2014
Posted Friday October 31, 2014 3:44pm

District 10 candidate Sheri Gallo's political advertising published in the Austin American-Statesman and printed on wrappers for subscribers’ newspapers did not include key disclosures required by the Texas Election Code and Austin City Code.

Texas Election Code Section 255.001 requires disclosure of the fact that express advocacy is political advertising and the full name of the person who paid for it. The disclosure required by Austin City Code Section 2-2-14 requires stating whether the candidate has—or has not—agreed to comply with contribution and expenditure limits of the Austin Fair Campaign Chapter.

In a telephone interview today, Gallo said, “We realized the problem Wednesday evening and contacted the paper.”

“I take full blame,” Gallo said. “It’s my duty to make sure things like this don’t happen.”

The 4-1/4-inch by 9-1/4-inch ad published on page A6 of the October 29 Statesman focused on a few of her qualifications and notes she has been endorsed by three former Austin mayors and a former mayor pro tem.

Zimmerman Sues Bulldog, Claims Defamation

District 6 candidate Don Zimmerman claims
‘The Austin Bulldog’ report made false statements

by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2014
Posted Wednesday October 15, 2014 10:59pm
Updated Thursday October 16, 2014 3pm (additions are underlined)

District 6 candidate Donald Shelly “Don” Zimmerman has filed a defamation lawsuit against The Austin Bulldog, according to Courthouse News Service.

The Austin Bulldog has not been served and has not seen a copy of the lawsuit, styled Don Zimmerman v. Austin Investigative Reporting Project dba The Austin Bulldog; Ken Martin Cause No. D-1-GN-14-004290. The Austin Investigative Reporting Project is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit for investigative reporting in the public interest.

The Austin Bulldog obtained a copy of the lawsuit, which was filed electronically, this afternoon. A copy is linked below.

“Don Zimmerman’s attack on The Austin Bulldog for publishing truthful information from recent court records is an attack on journalism and the public’s right to know what happens in our courts,” said attorney Bill Aleshire of Riggs Aleshire & Ray PC. “The Austin Bulldog will vigorously defend its reporting and defend the right of journalists to report about court proceedings.”

The attorney representing The Austin Bulldog in this litigation is Peter Kennedy of Graves Dougherty Hearon & Moody.

Candidate Lost Custody Over Abuse

District 6 Council candidate Don Zimmerman
injured, alienated daughter, court records state

Investigative Report by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2014
Posted Thursday October 9, 2014 3:10pm
Updated Wednesday October 15, 2014 7:42pm

Editor’s note: Don Zimmerman, through his attorney Stephen Casey, on October 10, 2014, sent a letter to The Austin Bulldog stating this article published October 9 subjected Zimmerman to defamation and demanded retraction. There is no reason for The Austin Bulldog to retract its report about the judicial proceeding that Zimmerman was involved in earlier this year.

The Austin Bulldog does listen to criticism of its reports, in this case, like all others. Therefore, in the interest of making this report the best possible fair, true, and impartial account of information contained in court records, we have updated it with additions (shown in underlined text) and deletions (shown in text with strikethroughs).

The update also includes a link to the Docket Sheet, which is the Travis County District Clerk’s official record of every action taken in this District Court case. Examination of the Docket Sheet, along with the records already linked to this report, reflects the fact that The Austin Bulldog had already published and made accessible to readers every substantive court filing made this year, starting with Casey’s filing for client Zimmerman of the Respondent’s Motion to Enter Final Order on March 10, 2014. All of the remaining court records and orders that were the basis of the story are included in the links below.

District 6 candidate Donald Shelly “Don” Zimmerman, founder of the Travis County Taxpayers Union, is an aggressive leader who as president of a municipal utility district brought two lawsuits, one of which resulted in winning a case before the U.S. Supreme Court.

But aggression in disciplining his then 12-year-old daughter, Marina Zimmerman, resulted in documented physical and emotional damage and permanent loss of parental rights through civil court action. Although by court order he remains a “parent possessory conservator,” with rights to certain information about his daughter, the order explicitly states that Don Zimmerman “shall have no possession of or access to” the minor child, who is now 15 years of age. Absent Zimmerman obtaining a new court order, such denial of access is permanent while the order is in effect.

The petition that led to the court order states, “Respondent (Zimmerman) has a history and pattern of physical and emotional abuse directed against M.Z. (daughter Marina Zimmerman).”

In response to the petition, an Agreed Order issued by the court June 16, 2014, states, “The Court finds that the material allegations in the petition to modify are true and the requested modification is in the best interest of the child. IT IS ORDERED that the requested modification is GRANTED.”

The court records of the proceedings in 2014 contain no evidence that Zimmerman contested the allegations of having a history and pattern of physical and emotional abuse of his daughter. In fact, Zimmerman signed the Agreed Order beneath this statement: “APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO AS TO BOTH FORM AND SUBSTANCE.”

Yet in an interview for this story as originally published Zimmerman repeatedly characterized the allegations as lies. His protestations are left intact in this update so that readers can judge the facts for themselves.

Three documented incidents

Candidates Rich and Poor Competing

Occupational income, investments, debts, real estate,
business interests, and much more detailed in filings

Investigative Report by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2014
Posted Tuesday, September 30, 2014 2:54pm
Updated Wednesday, October 1, 2014 10:52am to add Delia Garza’s loans to her campaign
Updated Thursday October 2, 2014 6:07am to identify Jimmy Paver as a District 7 candidate

Mayoral candidate Stephen Ira “Steve” Adler is clearly the wealthiest candidate running for city office, while his two chief opponents, incumbent Council Members Sheryl Nelson Cole and Michael William “Mike” Martinez, are merely well off, comparatively speaking, based on a review of their sworn financial statements.

These financial statements are separate and apart from the contribution and expenditure reports required in connection with election campaigns.

Personal resources provide a significant advantage if candidates choose to invest in their campaigns. But that advantage is diminished if not accompanied by the work it takes to build a broad base of support.

Campaigns are not won with checkbooks alone, but according to Campaign Finance Reports filed July 15, which reflected fundraising and expenditures through June 30, 21 candidates had already loaned their campaigns a combined half-million dollars—$509,926 (not $504,911 as first stated) to be exact. (More about that later.) The next batch of campaign finance reports, due October 5, will no doubt reflect even more personal spending to finance political ambitions.

The Austin Bulldog’s investigation of personal finances illustrates the vastly different resources the candidates can bring to bear as they race toward the November 4 election. And to carry them through to the December 16 runoff—if they make the initial cut. This analysis indicates the candidates range from the mega-wealthy to the downright poor. One of the candidates reported drawing unemployment benefits last year.

Shining light in dark corners