SC Council Candidates Raise and Spend Thousands

The five candidates for San Clemente City Council have raised and spent tens of thousands of dollars in the campaign for two seats up for grabs in November.

The five candidates for San Clemente City Council are in the final stretch leading up to the November election when two seats are up for grabs, and they've spent and raised cash accordingly.

Not counting loans -- almost all of which were made by the candidates themselves to their own campaigns – candidate Mike Mortenson was the top fundraiser through Sept. 30. With a donations and loans total of $18,543 raised, Mortenson has spent $10,165 on campaign materials, literature and other expenses.

Mortenson got a big boost from the California Real Estate Political Action Committee, which gave him $10,000 on Sept. 20.

Incumbent Jim Dahl's campaign manager also donated $200 to Mortenson. Though Dahl isn't formally running with Mortenson, he's told Patch he and Mortenson see eye-to-eye on many issues.

Mortenson has loaned his own campaign $3,000.

Incumbent Robert Baker has raised and spent the most overall. Baker will appear on the ballot as Robert "Bob" Baker 1 (.)

Baker 1 raised $34,214, $31,500 of which was a loan from himself to the campaign. He has so far spent $26,619. The bulk of that, $19,562, went to Freeman Public Affairs campaign consulting firm in Torrance.

Incumbent Dahl has raised $10,319, $3,192 of which is a loan from himself to his campaign. Through Sept. 30, he spent almost all his money―$10,121 to be exact.

Like Mortenson, Dahl collected money form the California Real Estate PAC, receiving $2,000 from the entity.

Former Councilman Joe Anderson and current Mayor Jim Evert also donated to Dahl's campaign as did the company that runs Fisherman's Restaurant on the San Clemente Pier.

Candidate Chris Hamm, the de-facto running partner to Baker 1 similar to Mortenson’s relationship to Dahl, raised $5,097 in cash contributions and in-kind contributions and had spent only $471 through Sept. 30.

Candidate David Clegg signed a paper vowing he would be spending and raising less than $1,000 during his campaign, meaning he doesn't have to fill out any donation disclosures.

EJ October 20, 2012 at 11:00 PM
Dahl and Mortenson all the way! Definitely the best choices out of the group.
Tom Barnes October 21, 2012 at 02:29 AM
Not only is your name an illegal product, Moonshine, but to not use your real name shows a lack of integrity. As for Mortenson's list of supporters they seem to be every special interest group around. The list itself should convince most residents to NOT vote for him. As for Dahl most residents understand the harm he has caused the city with his voting record and will probably vote ABD (anyone but Dahl).
Moonshine October 21, 2012 at 04:13 AM
Tom- Everyone knows that Moonshine was chosen because of how ridiculous the posts made by "Sunshine" were. I have plenty of integrity, no need for you to judge MY character, but since you brought it up-- I've heard of some choices you have made regarding a property, that show just how much integrity you have. Shocking that you try to bring up integrity... By the way-shouldn't you be too tired to post tonight from your big pizza party rally today?? Oh wait... you didn't get such a great turnout did you Tom? Not as many dogs and kids and surfboards as you hoped for huh??
Moonshine October 22, 2012 at 12:43 AM
David- I thought you find this entertaining... From BB1's website: "Special interests and PACS will try to influence this election by throwing money at candidates." Bob Baker1 This guy is a bigger hypocrite than we thought?! On top of spending 20K, the MAJORITY of his campaign funds, in Torrance, (NOT SC) he seems pretty fond of specific PAC's while he warns us to watch out for them on his own website?! This must be one of Bob's "Do as I say, not as Do" messages, he has quite a few of those... The PAC that is supporting him has spent TENS OF THOUSANDS on anti-dahl, anti-Mortenson mailers, he is right, they are throwing money at candidates indeed- and he is the candidate on the receiving end of all that money! Can not even believe that guy has the nerve to put that statement on his own website, knowing how much his sugar daddy's Watchdog PAC has spent on him?? I used to work in marketing, those mailers are EXPENSIVE, the PAC that is supporting Baker has sent 3, WOW. I'd say between 35-40K on negative mailers from that one PAC, from a guy with a warning on his own website to watch out for PAC's?! I don't know how that man sleeps at night. Turns my stomach.
PK October 23, 2012 at 05:11 PM
" A B D" I'll 2nd that!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »