“I am personally asking all of John’s campaign supporters who did not max out to help one last time,” said Melody Ramirez, a fundraiser for Duran’s March 5 re-election campaign, in an email message. “Our campaign was left with debt and we need to raise another $10,000 by March 31st!! Please consider making one last contribution of $100, $200 or $300 and help us retire our debt.”
Ramirez’s invitation suggests an individual donation of $250, a “host” donation of $500, and a donation of $1,000 from a couple. West Hollywood campaign finance laws limit contributions to $500 to any one candidate.
According to campaign expense reports filed through Feb. 16, Duran raised $87,725 in contributions, with the bulk of that coming from interests outside West Hollywood, including real estate developers, city vendors and billboard companies. Those reports show expenditures of $87,247, with much of that going to his campaign consultant, lobbyist Steve Afriat and to campaign mailings which flooded West Hollywood mailboxes in the final weeks before the election. Other expenditures went to hire campaign workers, make a donation to the Russian World War II Veterans Association and to WeHoNews, a website whose owner is a major promoter of Duran. Friends of West Hollywood, a separate campaign committee formed to support Duran’s candidacy, raised $46,750 through the Feb. 16 filing date, spending much of that on campaign mailings.
The West Hollywood City Council recently lifted the three-month deadline for raising campaign contributions after an election. The change effectively sets the deadline at nine months, the period at which a candidate must convert his or her campaign committee to a so-called officeholder account. Typically, significant additional donations flow after the election to those elected to the council from those wanting to curry favor with councilmembers. Councilmembers with cash leftover in their officeholder accounts typically use that to make donations to influential charities and political organizations.
The Sur event is 6 to 7:30 p.m. at 612 N. Robertson Blvd, north of Melrose. Those wishing to attend must RSVP to dailysmith@gmail.com.
I dunno, this sounds like bitter people all over again who supported one of the unsuccessful candidates. Or should I say the multi unsucessful candidate. Hilary Clinton went 10 million in debt. Dianne Feinstein had 2 million in debt in a previous senate campaign. Obama spent a billion. Your guy lost, finito the end. Duran and Prang won. And frankly just because one of the losing candidate couldn’t raise the money because no one had faith in him, doesn’t make him a saint.
Why would he be so irresponsible with his finances that he would have to beg for people to bail him out?
I agree with all previous commenters. this is embarrassing. it’s time to drain this swamp. campaign finance reform is needed. let’s become a progressive city.
Hmmm. What an embarrassment from every viewpoint. Folks should have a $25,000 or some definable limit and make do running on a record of real achievement for the city or whatever constitutes their area of expertise. Outside philanthropic ventures presumably are important in everyone’s life but they should not be considered as perks for elections. Neither should running in an election serve as a springboard for kickstarting one’s business interests. If folks aspire to public service they should be doers and givers, hopefully tempered by real verifiable experience. Original ideas for the future wouldn’t hurt either.
Why doesn’t just just the city credit card to cover it? Oh, THAT’S right. The last time he did this he wound up with a looming DA investigation that has not gone away!
Anyone else shocked that he voted against campaign finance reform at the last council meeting? What a joke.
Wait….What? His campaigned generated how much in total? And he still needs money to cover debt from the campaign? What am I missing here???
Say it with me again…”Campaign Finance Reform NOW”
I am speechless….