Gordo giving an interview, 2020 (Photos – Staff, screengrab)
An anonymous complaint to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) was filed (complaint ID 07202023-02023) alleging that Pasadena Mayor Victor Gordo’s campaign has exceeded state-imposed campaign contribution limits, in the 2023-2024 election cycle, but there could be a catch.
By News Desk
Assembly Bill 571 sets limits how much a candidate can receive in campaign contributions, specifically for cities that do not set a contribution limit for themselves. Pasadena has not set a limit, therefore the City’s limit falls under this state law.
For 2023-2024, the contribution limit for an individual, business entity, committee or PAC contributing in local races is set at $5,500. Gordo’s 2023 campaign finance filings show that in June of 2023 his 2020 campaign committee for Mayor received $20,000 from the Southern California District Council of Laborers PAC, as well as another $20,000 from the Laborers Local 300 Small Contributor Committee. Each contribution appears to be $14,500 over the state-imposed contribution limit.
However, AB 571 went into effect on January 1, 2021, and the law’s contribution limits are not retroactive for campaigns prior to 2021. Further, the FPPC has determined that AB 571’s post-election fundraising requirements do not apply to campaigns for elections prior to Jan. 1, 2021. Thus, it could be the case that the unions just paid off most of Mayor Gordo’s old campaign debt, which, according to Gordo’s campaign finance reports, consisted of just over $40,000 in loans from himself to his 2020 campaign. Moving forward, this will not be allowed.
In 2021, after Gordo was elected, he supported an ordinance introduced to the Pasadena City Council that set “no” limit for campaign contributions, specifically to bypass AB 571. The ordinance was later tabled due to public opposition and was never revisited. When the ordinance was discussed at the October 18, 2021, Pasadena City Council meeting, Mark Jomsky, Pasadena City Clerk, clarified that the City must adhere to state campaign contribution limits per AB 571 as long as the City does not impose its own contribution limits (see Oct., 18, 2021 City Council meeting video beginning at the 3:32:53 – 3:33:18 minute mark).
> Additional Reading: Pasadena Needs To Get Money Out of Elections
Reina Esparza contributed to this article.
We hope you appreciated this article. Before you move on, please consider supporting the Colorado Boulevard’s journalism.
Billionaires, hedge fund owners and local imposters have a powerful hold on the information that reaches the public. Colorado Boulevard stands to serve the public interest – not profit motives.
While fairness guides everything we do, we know there is a right and a wrong position in the fight against racism and climate crisis while supporting reproductive rights and social justice. We provide a fresh perspective on local politics – one so often missing from so-called ‘local’ journalism.
You can access Colorado Boulevard’s paywall-free journalism because of our unique reader-supported model. People like you, informed readers, keep us independent, beholden to no outside influence, and accessible to everyone.
Please consider supporting Colorado Boulevard today. Thank you. (Click to Support)
the original commenter was speaking about public employee unions, but the second commenter was speaking about private sector employee unions that work for corporations. I agree with the first commenter about public employee unions being way too powerful. I also agree with the second commenter about private industry needing more union membership, as corporations are way too greedy. But public employee unions shouldn’t control policy-making positions on councils and boards. That is bad for society. Officers need to be accountable to citizens, not the other way around.
unions are great for raising salaries, true. great for their members’ pockets. and the reason PUSD’s teachers’ salaries have been below average is they have long chosent to have high health care benefits (PPO’s, etc.) rather than say Arcadia USD, which is near the top of the salary comparison, but has chosen to have the lowest health care benefits. PPD officers are leaving because they don’t want to be accountable to the public and the police oversight commission that Pasadena now has. and police unions are the worst in general. currently we can’t get rid of deputy gangs in the la sheriff dept. because a judge blocked the investigation, citing the union’s right to have the revealing of officers’ tattoos subject to bargaining, as if tattoos are some sort of working condition. the law that puts unions above the public’s right not to be subject to deputy gangs really sucks. and no, not with California’s hugely generous pensions do we need more officers or fire personnel. 3% (!) of their highest salary x 30 yrs. of service means that police and fire can retire in their mid-50’s making 6 figures for their annual pension for the rest of their lives! Crazy stuff.
unions run the show in pasadena. the police and fire unions control the city council and mayor, and the teachers union controls the school board.
If unions really “run the show” then union members’ pay and working conditions would be much better. Pasadena’s pay scales for teachers have usually been well below average. PPD is losing officers who go to other departments that pay more. I don’t know about PDWP or PFD.
I’m tired of union bashing. The great era following WW II featured the highest level of union membership in this country’s history. Today unions are struggling to regain membership, and industry fights EVERY attempt by workers to unionize. We need more union membership.