In this year’s Richmond city elections, the biggest spenders aren’t corporations or wealthy donors — they’re the unions representing workers who fill the city’s offices, schools, police departments and buses.
And this year, they’re spending big.
In recent months, campaign finance records show tens of thousands of dollars have flowed into Richmond’s upcoming elections from outside political groups — PACs supporting two of the four candidates seeking to unseat Mayor Eduardo Martinez: Claudia Jimenez and Ahmad Anderson, as well as candidates for city council. The group spending the most: East Bay Working Families, a labor-backed nonprofit that has reported more than $104,000 in expenditures so far.
Jose Abastida, campaign manager for East Bay Working Families, said he would rather there be less money in politics. But with the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. FEC having opened the floodgates for unlimited outside spending, he sees little choice.
“As unions we disagree with Citizens United, we definitely think it should be people over money,” Abastinda said. “But the Supreme Court decision that favored corporations having a political voice is what led to this.”
The Citizens United ruling enabled corporations and other outside groups to spend unlimited money on elections, with a subsequent ruling that same year allowing the creation of super PACs — groups that can raise and spend unlimited sums but cannot directly coordinate with candidates.
Richmond has seen this kind of spending before: in 2014, Chevron poured millions into city council and mayoral races, though the candidates it backed were defeated.
East Bay Working Families: backed by unions, focused on Richmond
East Bay Working Families was founded in 2018 as Richmond Working Families, before changing its name in 2019. It’s classified as a social welfare organization nonprofit — a type of nonprofit that, unlike a charity, can engage in political spending. It’s been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in elections ever since.
The nonprofit has generally received the vast majority of its funding from Service Employees International Union Local 1021, or SEIU 1021, which represents more than 54,000 workers in local governments, nonprofits, healthcare programs and schools throughout Northern California.
In its early years, the organization spent funds not just supporting candidates and measures in Richmond elections, but also on candidates and ballot measures in surrounding cities, such as Oakland, Antioch and Berkeley, along with state races. In 2018 it spent almost $900,000, according to state filings. About $425,000, or 47%, went exclusively toward supporting Jovanka Beckles’ unsuccessful state Assembly run.
In recent years, it also received funds from another public employee union. IFPTE Local 21, which represents over 11,000 professional, technical, and supervisory public sector workers in the Bay Area, has contributed $35,000 since 2022. Additionally a few other political action committees have supported the organization, most notably California Ranked Choice Voting Coalition, which contributed almost $58,000 in 2024.
Since at least 2022, Abastinda said, SEIU 1021 and IFPTE Local 21 have worked with United Teachers of Richmond (UTR) and two community groups — the Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN) and the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) — to form a coalition. For East Bay Working Families to spend money on a candidate or measure, all five groups must first sign off with an endorsement.
Since 2022, East Bay Working Families has focused almost exclusively on Richmond candidates and ballot measures. It spent roughly $55,000 on Martinez’s successful mayoral campaign that year; $15,000 on Robinson’s successful council bid; and $18,000 on Jamin Pursell’s unsuccessful council run. Pursell is currently running against city council incumbent Soheila Bana and Keycha Gallon in the District 4 city council race.
In the 2024 election, it spent about $66,000 on Jimenez’s successful council run; $62,000 on Sue Wilson’s successful council run; and $65,000 on Melvin Willis’ unsuccessful council reelection campaign. It also spent about $84,000 supporting a ranked choice ballot measure, which didn’t pass; and $84,000 opposing a separate election reform act, which did pass.
In an interview with Richmondside, Abastida said he thinks that East Bay Working Families is “seen as the good guys” in Richmond, because they support “candidates that are pro-housing, pro-environment, pro-worker.” Endorsement decisions, he said, are made by workers, most of whom work for the city, as SEIU and IFPTE represent many city employees.
East Bay Working Families has reported spending the majority of these funds, roughly $67,550, supporting Jimenez. About $33,000 went toward mailers, flyers and other canvassing expenses; $30,000 went toward online and digital ads; $4,000 went to video production; and $550 was for website expenses.
East Bay Working Families also reported spending about $36,550 supporting Robinson. About $21,000 of these funds were spent on mailers, flyers; and other canvassing expenses; $12,500 was for digital and online ads; $2,500 was for video production; and $550 was for website expenses.
Additionally, the organization reported spending a little more than $4,000 to support Measure B, a five-year countywide 0.625% sales tax increase to fund healthcare, food assistance and other general county services.
The organization isn’t the only group supporting Jimenez and Robinson with independent expenditures. The California Working Families Party group reported spending about $5,400 on these candidates. The group exists under the Working Families Party, a national political party that supports raising the minimum wage, universal healthcare, canceling student debt and environmental reform. This appears to be its first time spending money in a Richmond election.
Of that, about $4,400 went toward supporting Jimenez’s campaign — roughly $3,800 on mailers and roughly $600 on staffing, texting and phone banking, plus an undisclosed amount in digital ads.
The group spent about $1,025 supporting Robinson, roughly $625 on mailers and $400 on staff time, phone banking and texting.
Independent of East Bay Working Families, both SEIU and UTR have spent money supporting candidates, not through independent expenditures, but through directly contributing the max amount directly to their campaigns.
SEIU contributed $2,500 to Bana, Jimenez, and Robinson. It also contributed $2,500 to Cesar Zepeda’s city council campaign earlier this month, although he is running unopposed.
UTR contributed $2,500 to Jimenez, Robinson and Bana’s campaigns.
Police union PAC spending surges; Chevron largely absent this cycle
Abastinda said that part of the reason East Bay Working Families exists is Chevron, which he said has “had a hold on Richmond politics for 15 years due to its influence of big money.”
While Chevron has spent millions on past Richmond elections, it doesn’t appear to be spending large amounts of money currently, as no contributions are listed as coming directly from it. One Chevron employee — financial planner Mark Bennett — did make a $100 personal contribution to mayoral candidate Demnlus Johnson.
The only other entity spending tens of thousands of dollars is, in fact, another union: Richmond’s police union political action committee.
The Richmond Police Officers Association PAC has spent just under $65,000 this primary election season, with more than $48,000 of that coming in the past month, according to campaign finance records.
The heaviest contribution the RPOA PAC made during this period was $30,000 toward another PAC named Safe Richmond Neighborhoods, which is supporting Anderson’s mayoral campaign. It reported spending just more than $41,000, with $15,000 for campaign mailers and another $25,000 for digital ads and about $1,300 in legal services for the committee supporting Anderson’s campaign.
Additionally, the RPOA PAC made $2,500 in contributions to both Bana and Pursell in the District 4 race, seemingly hedging their bets in the district, which encompasses a number of neighborhoods in the eastern portion of Richmond. The PAC’s only other contribution was $5,000 to Xavier Becerra’s campaign for California governor.
The RPOA PAC also reported contributing $30,000 to a committee called Richmond Citizen Safety on May 6, according to the period filings.
Richmond Citizen Safety appeared to be laying the groundwork for a future ballot measure to fund police staffing and add paramedics to fire trucks.
RPOA president Sgt. Ben Therriault shared with Richmondside that a notice of intent to circulate a citizen initiative petition was filed on Friday with the Richmond City Clerk’s office.
The initiative would amend the city charter to establish a dedicated Public Safety Fund and set a minimum sworn officer staffing floor of 187 positions.
The proposed charter amendment would require the city to redirect “locally generated unrestricted revenues” into the fund — 25% in the first year, 40% in the second, and 50% by the third year and beyond — to be used exclusively for public safety, including police services, emergency medical responseand violence prevention programs.
Police staffing has been an issue the union has advocated for in the years since the city reallocated money from unfilled positions and diverted them to alternative responses to law enforcement, such as the crisis response program Reach Out with Compassion and Kindness (ROCK) and the Office of Neighborhood Safety (ONS) in 2021. Since then, two reports and a civil grand jury report have called for the city to hire more officers.
While the initiative’s broad definition of public safety purposes could allow fire and emergency medical services to access the fund, Therriault said the fire department has not yet been formally brought into conversations about the effort. He said the timeliness of the initiative drove the decision to move forward before those discussions could take place, though he left open the possibility of a future collaboration with the firefighters union.
The paramedic question came up at the city council’s April 21 meeting, when fire Chief Aaron Osorio presented a plan to transition the department to “advanced life support” — a move that would cost about $4.1 million annually. City staff recommended exploring a November 2026 ballot measure to fund it.
Six candidates file financial disclosures on time; labor unions rally behind Bana
In contrast to independent expenditures and their related committees, candidates are able to receive up to a $2,500 maximum from single contributors.
As of Friday morning, only six of 10 candidates in the three Richmond races had filed campaign finance statements on time: mayoral candidates Anderson, Johnson and Martinez; District 3 incumbent Robinson and District 4 candidates Pursell and Bana.
Of the six candidates who have reported contributions, Bana has received the most money in the last month, reporting nearly $21,000, coming mainly from the local labor unions, including: maximum $2,500 contributions from the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local 188 Independent PAC, SEIU Local 1021, IBEW 302, United Association Local 342 (plumbers and pipefitters) PAC, Richmond Police Officers Association PAC and UTR. She also received contributions from IFPTE Local 21 for $500 and $1,000 each from the Livermore-based Sheetmetal Workers Union Local 104 PAC and the Martinez-based Plumbing Industry Consumer Protection Fund United Association Local No. 159.
Additionally, Bana reported receiving $2,500 from El Sobrante-based attorney Mitra Yazdi. She spent about $11,500 during this period mainly on campaign consultants.
Anderson reported just under $20,000 in contributions during the period with maximum amounts being given by local labor unions, the UA Local 342 PAC and the IBEW 302 Community Candidates PAC. He also reported a $2,500 contribution from Garry Hurlbut, president of the Richmond Tennis Association and a Point Richmond resident, and $1,000 from Leesa Miao, a board member of the San Francisco-based synagogue Congregation Emanu-El.
Anderson also received a maximum contribution from state Sen. Jesse Arreguín.
Anderson spent just over $15,000 with the bulk of his expenses on advertising, marketing and mailers.
Jimenez did not file campaign finance disclosures for the period by the Thursday deadline, though she filed a number of forms detailing contributions of $1,000 to $2,500. Candidates who receive that amount must report it within 24 hours. The filings detail a number of larger contributions Jimenez received from PACs during the period.
Three PACs — APEN Action, IFPTE Local 21 TJ Anthony and SEIU 1021 PAC — gave maximum contributions of $2,500 to Jimenez’s campaign in May.
Robinson reported receiving just more than $10,000 this filing period, according to records, with much of the money coming from labor union PACs. She spent just less than $7,000 this period mainly on printing costs, administrative services and campaign consultants.
During the period, Robinson reported receiving the maximum $2,500 contributions from IAFF Local 188 Independent PAC, SEIU Local 1021 Candidate PAC, the APEN Action PAC and IFPTE Local 21 TJ Anthony PAC Fund.
Pursell raised just more than $6,000 this period, with the bulk coming from maximum $2,500 contributions from the RPOA PAC and the UA Local 342 PAC. He spent just over $2,500 in mailing services.
In the mayoral race, Martinez reported a net of negative $100 after returning a $1,000 contribution from Pinole resident Mary Wika, CEO of Bay Hawk Inc., a general engineering contracting company. In November, Bay Hawk entered into a two-year $275,200 contract with the Richmond Housing Authority — which the Richmond city council oversees — to do paving, sidewalk and walkway restoration work. Martinez voted in favor of the contract.
When Richmondside asked Martinez last month about the contribution, he said he would return it to ensure he would be in compliance with a state law limiting elected officials from taking contributions from entities with contracts they potentially could vote on within certain time periods.
During the recent filing period, Martinez received $600 from Palm Halal Food Market and $300 from Oakland Halal Meat Market. He did not report any spending.
Johnson reported receiving just more than $4,000 this reporting period with the main contributions coming from a maximum contribution by the Amalgated Transit Union Local 1555 PAC and $1,000 from the Plumbing Industry Consumer Protection Fund UA Local No. 159. He reported spending about $580 this period for website costs and campaign merchandise.
Johnson’s campaign is carrying $3,867 in outstanding balances at the close of the reporting period, including $1,360 in unpaid loans he made to his own committee and $2,507 owed to Oakland-based Axial Media & Communications for lawn and window signs.
Why are you putting RPOA PAC and Chevron in the same subtitle: “Police union PAC spending surges; Chevron largely absent this cycle”?
You are falsely trying to draw a correlation between RPOA and Chevron. Why?
Chevron has been MIA in Richmond elections since their shellacking in 2014. So please prove this false corollary or immediately revise.
Enough with this false & biased reporting. We get enough lies, on repeat, from the candidates. We don’t need more from journalists and media outlets that should remain independent and impartial.
There is no intent to relate the two. The semicolon separates them as two topics and is to let the reader know this section of the story looks at these two topics.