Livin’ It Up Off Campaign Donations

When the average citizen donates to a local political candidate, they do so in the belief that it will be used to help the candidate win their respective race. This means donations are typically used to pay for advertising and signs, office expenses, campaign staff, website hosting, etc.

However, according to a review of the most recent City Council semi-annual campaign finance reports, several elected officials used campaign donations for luxury hotel stays, international travel, monetary transfers to other political candidates, and other expenses not directly related to their own political campaigns.

Mayor Ron Nirenberg continues to amass a large war chest that will no doubt fund his future political ambitions for state or national office. During this reporting period, the mayor raised $272,540, and has $332,825 on hand.

And he is certainly not done begging for more money, even though he has a virtual lock to win re-election.

On January 26, Nirenberg tweeted that he “just filed for my fourth and final term as your mayor.”  While property crimes and homicides increased in 2022, the tone-deaf Nirenberg exclaimed that he is “going to protect our families” and “keep more money in your pockets” while clearly asking constituents to empty them and donate to his re-election campaign.

However, while the mayor will most assuredly increase his political wealth, he did not hesitate to use existing campaign donations for both interstate and international travel, as well as fine dining.

In November 2022, he traveled to Los Angeles and used campaign funds to pay for the airfare. The mayor stayed at the luxurious Hilton Checkers, which offers panoramic views of L.A. from a well-appointed rooftop terrace and a bar with “1920s speakeasy-inspired vibes.”

Though campaign finance reports require that candidates disclose the purpose of out-of-state travel to include the name of the conference, seminar, or other event, the mayor simply wrote “meetings.” Such a generic entry does not inspire faith that Mr. Nirenberg is truly transparent with his donors.

In December, the mayor, District 8 Councilman Manny Pelaez, and District 6 Councilwoman Melissa Cabello-Havrda traveled to India. It’s unknown who paid for the bulk of the trip, which the mayor described as an “economic and cultural trade mission.”

However, he did pay United Airlines over $2,000 from his campaign funds to upgrade his seats.

Finally, while thousands of working-class families in San Antonio struggled to put food on their tables, Nirenberg spent over $6,000 to fête big donors at an event catered by the Menger Hotel.

While the Mayor pulled in a healthy cash haul, former District 7 Councilwoman Ana Sandoval raised just $3,760 and had $8,345 on hand.

Ms. Sandoval’s reports show that she redistributed her campaign donations to unidentified individuals and other political candidates. This perhaps signaled that she intended not to run for re-election as early as September.

While lobbyists and wealthy donors may not care if and how a candidate redistributes donations, others may take exception to their donations being used to support candidates or organizations that may not align with their personal values.

Ms. Sandoval transferred $250 to the Frank Ramirez campaign for Texas State House District 118. Ramirez was her Zoning and Planning Director.

She also transferred $500 to Beto O’Rourke’s recent gubernatorial bid, $250 to District 5 Councilwoman Terry Castillo, and $250 to Greg Casar, who was recently elected to represent Texas District 35 in the U.S. Congress.

She also used donations to pay $5,357 to the Motel 6 located at 9400 Wurzbach Road for “Room & Board for Displaced Constituent”.

While concerned citizens may be taken aback by this latest round of sheer wasteful and, at times, dubious spending, the San Antonio Ethics Review Board met on January 30 to discuss increasing the amount of money individuals can donate to campaigns.

This is alarming because city council elections have quickly evolved into high-dollar races which makes it all but impossible for an average citizen to consider running for office.  Many incumbents automatically receive the maximum donation each cycle from lobbyists and other wealthy individuals.

If campaign donation limits are raised, incumbents are more likely to become beholden to the well-heeled. This is an alarming trend in local San Antonio politics and will lead to the growth of a donor class. They will always get a seat at the table whereas constituents are left scrambling for crumbs.

The Ethics Review Board should not raise campaign contribution limits. In fact, they should bar lobbyists from donating as well individuals (and their immediate families) who receive city contracts or grants.

But such action requires courage and in today’s political landscape, that appears to be in short supply.