By Scott Thomas Anderson

Sometimes the checks written to a political candidate in a race do not tell the story.

That’s true of the funding dynamics of the Sacramento mayor’s race.

At the end of January, Dr. Dr. Flojaune Cofer had received more than $174,440 in direct contributions to her campaign, while Assemblyman Kevin McCarty had netted more than $567, 700. But those numbers don’t reflect the broader reality of what some organizations are spending on behalf of the candidates as opposed to the money they’re giving directly to them. A new SN&R analysis of independent expenditures in the contest shows that specialized groups and Political Action Committees poured serious cash into the race to support or oppose McCarty or Cofer.

Here is a review of the public filings.  

PACs and organizations have now spent $1,117,748 to try to stop either McCarty or Cofer from getting over the mayoral finish line.

The race’s top spender is a PAC called Sacramento Tomorrow, which has been funding political literature to oppose McCarty to the tune of $539,360 during the primary. As an organization, Sacramento Tomorrow has not posted a mission statement or a values declaration. City records indicate the official treasurer for Sacramento Tomorrow is an attorney named Ashlee N. Titus, who works for the law firm Bell Mc Andrews Hiltachk. Titus is the current president of California Political Attorneys Association (CPAA). Sacramento Tomorrow’s assistant treasurer is Brian T. Hildreth, who’s employed by the same law firm. Hildrethg is a past president of the CPAA, as well as a current board member of the Sacramento Tactical Foundation. According to Hildreth’s bio page on his law firm’s website, the Sacramento Tactical Foundation “is dedicated to providing law enforcement teams (SWAT, SED, K9) with specialized equipment to further ensure the safety of deputies and officers in the line of duty.” The website Transparency USA documents that Sacramento Tomorrow is a PAC that has received funds from the California Association of Realtors, the California Apartment Association, PG&E Corporation and Equity California.   

The next biggest player is a PAC called California Alliance of Family Owned Businesses. That group spent $303,354 on campaign mailers and “data” work to oppose McCarty during the primary. This organization says that its mission is to “foster the success, resilience, and intergenerational continuity of family businesses across California,” adding, “we are dedicated to preserving the unique values and legacies of family businesses, while promoting sustainable practices, innovation, and economic vitality in the California business landscape.”

The third most-involved PAC is called Working Families for a Better Sacramento Supporting Kevin McCarty for Mayor 2024. I know, it’s a mouthful. This committee has spent $176,025 to support McCarty’s candidacy. According to Transparency USA, this PAC receives funds from California State Association of Electrical Workers, Sheet Metal Workers Local Union, the Standing Committee on Political Education of the California Labor Federation AFL-CIO and Smart Justice California Action Fund. That last group, Smart Justice California, does have a publicly shared mission statement, noting that it seeks to “educates and emboldens policymakers who support meaningful criminal justice reform that promotes safety, fairness and healthy communities.”

Coming in fourth for independent expenditures is the Silicon Valley Jobs PAC, which is sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce. That organization, with obvious ties to Big Tech, has spent $53,896 on “research” and mailers that opposed McCarty during the primary. Separate from anything that McCarty himself has been involved with, tech-related controversies have arisen at City Hall in recent years. Back in 2017, Mayor Darrell Steinberg – hoping to make Sacramento an innovation hub – entered into a controversial deal that gave Verizon Wireless major access to the city’s telecommunication’s grid, which in turn allowed the $184 billion corporation to experiment with expanding its 5G networks. This partnership was blasted by a host of critics. By 2019, the public outcry had grown so loud that the city was compelled to launch a new safety review of Verizon’s 5G tower plans. Around that same time, Steinberg struck another embattled deal with a tech company, this time with a self-driving vehicle start-up from Silicon Valley called Phantom Auto. Again, Steinberg gave a for-profit company access to the city’s infrastructure, all in hopes of promoting automated vehicles in Sacramento. That deal was denounced from different sectors, including by some of the 18,000 Sacramento-area residents who make their living through driving cabs, long-haul trucks, shuttle buses and delivery vehicles – not to mention those who are scaping by partly through driving for Uber or Lyft.

The fifth biggest independent contributor in the race is the PAC for the Sacramento Area Firefighters Union Local 522: It put some $25,000 into the contest on McCarty’s behalf. In recent years, negotiating firefighter pay and compensation contracts has been an ongoing and often contentious drama at City Hall. Separate from that trend, the Sacramento Fire Department came under fire last week during a public meeting at Urban Hive about the city’s creative economy. Two different long-time festival promotors told city leadership that the fire department’s inspectors have been charging “extortionary” fees to green-light cultural and entertainment events, and that these inspectors have been insisting on getting paid for time when they’re not even at the events. Both McCarty and Cofer were on hand to hear these claims.

For Cofer’s part, the main PAC spending independent money to forward her candidacy is California Workers’ Justice Coalition, which is sponsored by SEIU Local 1021. That union describes itself as having “60K working people across Northern California united for dignity, justice, and a better life.” According to Transparency USA, this PAC was particularly active in raising and spending money between 2022 and 2023, though has been less active this year.

Generally, the role – and consequences – of independent expenditures from PACs came into sharp focus for Sacramento County in 2016. That’s when a number of developers gave tens of thousands of dollars to Folsom Chamber of Commerce’s political action committee, which in turn spent the money supporting four specific city council candidates in favor of said developers’ highly controversial South of 50 housing project. At that time, if Folsom voters looked up direct contributions from the South of 50 developers to those four candidates, they would merely see a single $100 donation in each case. It was only by reviewing the financial records of the Folsom Chamber of Commerce’s PAC that members of the public would know thousands of dollars originating from those developers were spent on the candidates’ behalf. Three of those four candidates – Kerri Howell, Steve Miklos and Andy Morin – were elected. They soon got the South of 50 project across the regulatory finish line, obliterating 3,600 acres of open space in Sacramento County in the process. As SN&R recently reported, Folsom’s population has risen at more than triple the rate of Sacramento’s since the South of 50 development broke ground. It’s water supply and traffic infrastructure have not.    

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this story that posted this morning incorrectly identified whether Sacramento Tomorrow, Silicon Valley Jobs PAC and California Alliance of Family Owned Businesses were supporting or opposing McCarty during the primary. Those groups spent to oppose him.