Richardson Council Election Lessons Learned

More money, more partisan, more politics

Now that the Richardson City Council election is history, it's time to draw some history lessons.

• Money Talks

  This was probably the most expensive election in Richardson history. Campaign yard signs bloomed like spring wildflowers. Campaign flyers stuffed mailboxes. Campaign robocalls kept home phones ringing. Political action committees spent freely. The Richardson Fire Fighters Association PAC reported $12,885 in political expenditures this year, mostly in a losing effort. The Richardson Coalition PAC reported $8,317 in political expenditures, in a winning effort, as all of its endorsements prevailed in their races.

  Those same reports suggest that the Richardson Coalition PAC's efforts were significantly more than that. Since the last election, the PAC has reported contributions of over $39,000, political expenditures of $8,400, and cash on hand as of April 29 of $131.09. In other words, this PAC is spending a lot of money on things that the PAC doesn't consider political expenditures. Things like surveys that the PAC used to imply that the council members it opposed weren't sufficiently guarding Richardson against an imagined invasion of adult-oriented businesses or were being unduly influenced by union PACs (i.e, Richardson fire fighters). Total up all expenditures and the Richardson Coalition PAC's monetary influence on Richardson politics greatly exceeds its reported "political expenditures".

  Those reports also reveal a bit of disingenuousness on the part of the Richardson Coalition PAC. In an earlier "editorial", ironically having "regarding transparency" in the title, the PAC claimed to have not contributed a single dollar to political candidates. As the following correction included in the PAC's filing with the Texas Ethics Commission makes clear, there is more than one way to contribute to political candidates.

  "Since Richardson City Council member Mr. Steve Mitchell ran unopposed we incorrectly assumed we did not need to show a portion of the expense for the voter's guide as a donation since he would have won without our support. Our voter's guide did support Mr. Mitchell so therefore we are considering a portion of the expense for the voter's guide to be an in-kind donation to his campaign."

  By the way, that footnote appeared in the PAC's "8 Day Before Election" report, due May 1, but not filed until May 18, more than a week after the election, too late for voters to take into account this PAC's spending before voters had to make their choices at the polls.

• Ebby Halliday Has No Coattails

  If we learned that money talks, we also learned that having Ebby Halliday in your corner doesn't. Sheryl Miller and Chris Davis, the two candidates for Place 3 who each claimed to have been endorsed by Ebby Halliday, lost handily to John Murphy, who made no such claim.

• Elections Have Consequences

  As expected, Gary Slagel, the former mayor endorsed by the Richardson Coalition PAC, was restored to that office by the new council, all of whom were elected with the support of the PAC.

• The Perpetual Campaign Is With Us

  After the election, the Richardson Coalition PAC " gloated about sweeping the field" (The Dallas Morning News' Jeffrey Weiss' characterization, not mine). The PAC takes credit for the increased turnout at the polls. By one estimate, turnout increased from 11% to just over 12%, a questionable return for the money spent on the election. Somehow, I agree with Jeffrey Weiss' implication that the PAC is happier with who won than with how many voters turned out. In any case, the real reason for the PAC's editorial is revealed in this sentence near the end:

  "In an effort to achieve [increased voter turnout in future], we would like to invite you to help us increase citizen awareness and involvement by inviting your friends and neighbors to join the Richardson Coalition e-mail community."

  In other words, the Richardson Coalition PAC intends to run a perpetual campaign. Just don't expect it to call it that. Expect the PAC to continue to claim to be about "policy and principles," not partisan politics.

• If You Can't Beat 'em, Copy 'em

  Some of the opponents of the Richardson Coalition PAC, so vocally upset with the influence this PAC had on the recent election, have decided to adopt the same playbook. Destiny, of the Conserve & Protect blog, hints broadly that efforts are underway to establish a new political action committee, presumably to counteract the influence of the Richardson Coalition PAC. If this effort succeeds, expect the next election to be even more expensive than the last.