The most recent financial disclosures are in¹, and although we have a good idea who is supporting each candidate, there are still some serious problems with Mr Lerma’s disclosures. In short, Mr Lerma continues to commingle funds in his 2020 and 2023 campaigns (which we discussed at length in an earlier post) and is not fully disclosing expenses (more below). We assume that the contributor list is finally complete and up to date, allowing us to understand who is behind each candidate, so we can take a look at that.

Knowing who is supporting each candidate is important information to help voters determine where the candidates stand on issues that are important them, which is why we #Followthemoney in every school board election. Since 2012, there has been a LOT of billionaire money coming into school board elections from outside of Oakland to support privatization, school closures and charter schools. In response to all that big PAC money, the unions that represent the educators, classified staff and district workers in OUSD have created their own Independent Expenditure committees funded by their workers to support candidates who support the public schools that they work in, and the unions that they belong to.

In 2016, GO Public Schools and the California Charter School Association (“CCSA”) spent an astonishing $785,000 in 4 races (while OEA spent less than $25,000), and the charter backing GO/CCSA slate won all 4 seats. By 2020, the charter alliance spending (flush with $500,000 from former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and more from CCSA) of $678,500 still dwarfed the teacher spending ($250,000), but 3 of 4 teacher backed candidates won seats on the board. It was clear that voters trust their teachers and workers, and do not want out-of-town billionaires deciding what happens in our schools. The charter alliance clearly understood that their super PAC strategy no longer worked in Oakland, and so they have changed tactics. There may still be billionaire backed PAC spending to come late (so as to hide it as long as possible) but in the meantime, the local charter industry supporters have thrown their money directly to Mr Lerma’s campaign.

So looking at the numbers, who is supporting each candidate? Mr Lerma has received contributions from 70 plus individuals, $21,150 in enumerated contributions of over $100, with an average contribution amount of $302 per contributor. Mr Lerma also received $1,446 in small dollar donations – those less than $100 which do not need to be itemized. Although Mr Lerma has claimed to be running a “grassroots” campaign², his contributor list tells a different story.

Mr Lerma has 19 Contributors who donated the maximum allowed amount and 24 who contributed $500 or more (as compared to Ms Ritzie-Hernandez who had 2). One of the new strategies being used by the billionaire backed GO/CCSA crowd is to have its donors contribute DIRECTLY to candidates instead of spending large amounts of money through a PAC, and it is clear that thus far this is the case. It is also possible that in the last ten days leading up to this election these billionaire backed PACs could dwarf all spending that has happened to now. In 2022, $121,000 came in just in the ten days before the election to support the privatization candidates.

Ms Ritzie-Hernandez raised $13,542 total, $3,600 from 3 unions (plumbers, laborers and SEIU classified staff) and 57 individual contributions averaging $174 per contribution, plus $1,558 in small donations. Most of her contributions come from teachers and just 9% of total funds raised came from contributions of $500 or more. Ms Ritzie-Hernandez does benefit from spending by the unions of OUSD teachers and staff as well as the Oakland Rising Action PAC which is “a community-led political organization focused on supporting candidates and issues that drive a progressive agenda for Oakland’s working-class, immigrant and communities of color living in the flatlands of Oakland.³” There is a significant difference between spending by PACs which are fully funded by out of town billionaires like Michael Bloomberg and Stacy Schusterman who know nothing about Oakland’s kids, and spending by local unions and progressive groups who work every day with Oakland students and families.

It is clear that both Ms Ritzie-Hernandez and Mr Lerma have roots in the District 5 community. Mr Lerma ran for school board in 2020 (when he was not the chosen charter industry candidate), and ran a much more “grassroots” campaign with just 7 contributions over $500 and just 2 GO major donors. Interestingly, just 5 contributors from his 2020 campaign chose to contribute this time around. This time, it is clear that the billionaire-backed charter industry believes that Mr Lerma is aligned with them on school closures and charter schools, and that is alarming. That is why it is so important to know who is funding his campaign, and why his delay in reporting was so troubling.

We appreciate that Mr Lerma’s campaign filed his 460s in a timely manner in this second reporting period, but there are still some very concerning ethical problems with his filing. As we have previously reported, Mr Lerma continues to use his 2020 campaign to raise funds, despite (finally) having a bank account for the 2023 campaign to collect them. To this day, his campaign “donate” button still uses the 2020 campaign FPPC number, contrary to law. Commingling of funds is absolutely prohibited and makes it impossible to accurately track campaign spending. We are concerned that Mr Lerma is not able to manage his campaign finances, which does not bode well for his ability to manage an $800 million district budget.

Even more concerning, however, is his continued failure to fully disclose his expenditures. We don’t know everything that Mr Lerma has spent money on, but we do know that he failed to disclose the expenditures for at least two mailers that went out to voters in the relevant period. This is not a small oversight, a forgotten receipt, this is likely thousands of dollars for printing and postage that do not show up on his reports, either as a payment, or an amount due. This is truly astonishing and reinforces our concerns about Mr Lerma’s ability to lead District 5 in a way that is competent, ethical, transparent and accountable to students.

If you live in District 5, please vote. You should have received a ballot in the mail, with just this one item on it, which you can fill out and return in the mail (no postage needed) by November 7th. You can also drop your completed ballot at one of two drop boxes (Peralta Hacienda and Cesar Chavez Library⁴). Finally, starting October 28th, you can vote in person in just one location: Think College Now Elementary School, 2825 International Boulevard. In person voting ends at 8 pm November 7, 2023. #vote

1. All campaign expense data is taken from the Oakland Public Ethics Commission site found online at https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/Default.aspx?focus=SearchName ↩︎
2. See for example https://archives.kpfa.org/data/20231025-Wed1430.mp3 ↩︎
3. https://oaklandrisingaction.org/about/ ↩︎
4. 2496 Coolidge Avenue, 3301 E. 12th Street ↩︎

Spoiler alert: Mr. Lerma illegally used his failed 2020 campaign to solicit contributions and make expenditures for his 2023 campaign in an attempt to hide who is financing his campaign.

TIMELINE

• 7/25/2023: Mr. Lerma filed his Candidate Intention Statement (form 501) for the 2023 special election for Oakland School Board, district 5¹
• 8/11/2023: Date that the qualification threshold of $2,000 in campaign activity is met, starting the clock on the ten-day window to file a Statement of Information (form 410) for the 2023 campaign (but the form 410 wasn’t filed until 10/12/2023 – two months late)²
• 9/7/2023: Mr. Lerma hosts a campaign mixer fundraising event with a link to donate and a note that says “Paid for by Jorge Lerma for Oakland School Board 2023 FPPC#1427022“, which is the Fair Political Practices Commission (“FPPC”) number from the 2020 campaign. This event was attended by former board members Gary Yee and Jumoke Hinton as well as charter industry leaders Kimi Kean and Hae-Sin Thomas, who were affiliated with the Bloomberg/Schusterman funded super PAC that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on past school board campaigns^{3 4}
• 9/19/2023: Libby Schaaf hosts a fundraiser for the 2023 Campaign, attended by various former politicos and charter industry leaders⁵
• 9/21/2023: Mr. Lerma or his experienced treasurer (a tax accounting professional who acted as treasurer for the 2020 campaign, as well as the 2016 re-election campaign of Oakland City Council Member Noel Gallo) transferred $12,927.15 in 2023 Campaign funds illegally collected using the 2020 Campaign committee from the 2020 account into the 2023 Campaign account (which demonstrates that Mr. Lerma knew that he could not just use his 2020 Campaign for the 2023 Election)⁶
• 9/28/2023: Date that every candidate for office in November must file a form 460 identifying all contributions and expenditures made between July 1 and September 23 – Candidate Sasha Ritzie-Hernandez files as required, Mr. Lerma does not file for either the 2020 OR the 2023 Campaign. If he had a good faith belief that he could use his 2020 campaign for the 2023 election, he would have filed the 460 for the 2020 campaign (showing all of the expenditures and contributors to the campaign) on time. Mr Lerma had filed every previous required disclosure for his 2020 campaign on time without issue.⁷
• 10/10/2023: Parents United initial twitter post about the election finances, raising concerns about Mr Lerma’s failure to file his form 460
• 10/12/2023: Mr. Lerma finally files (52 days late) his Statement of Organization for his 2023 Committee entitled “Jorge Lerma for Oakland School Board 2023” (form 410) which was due not later than 8/21/2023⁸
• 10/13/2023: 2023 campaign is issued an FPPC number 1463520⁹
• 10/14/2023: Approximate date that Mr Lerma uses the United States Postal Service to mail a two page flier to voters, with the notification that the mailing was “paid for by Jorge Lerma for Oakland School Board 2023 FPPC#1427022” – again illegally using the FPPC number for the 2020 campaign in what may be a federal violation of law in addition to state and local laws¹⁰
• 10/17/2023: Mr Lerma files his form 460 for the 2023 campaign (19 days late) which indicates NO CONTRIBUTIONS (despite having attended at least 2 fundraisers) and NO EXPENDITURES (despite having created lawn signs, mailers, door hangers and other expenses)¹¹
• 10/19/2023: Mr Lerma files a form 460 for the 2020 campaign (21 days late) which finally lists WHO has contributed to his campaign and what he has spent money on.¹²
• 10/20/2023: Voters receive another mailer from the 2023 campaign committee, using the 2020 campaign FPPC# 1427022 rather than the 2023 Campaign FPPC number 1463520 issued a week earlier¹³
• 10/22/2023: Website continues to illegally list the 2020 campaign FPPC number on its “donate” page.¹⁴

---

On October 10, 2023 we posted (on the platform formerly known as twitter) what we planned to be the first in our regular “Follow the Money” series for the Oakland Unified school board races¹⁵. Since 2016, billionaires like Michael Bloomberg, Stacy Schusterman and Arthur Rock have flooded our school board elections with millions in out-of-town dollars to buy a school board that supports charter schools and privatization,¹⁶ and Parents United has shared that important information with voters to ensure that we elect candidates who support our Oakland public schools.¹⁷

As of October 10, 2023, only one of the two District 5 candidates in this special election had filed the disclosures that are required to be filed by all candidates not later than September 28, 2023: first time candidate Sasha Ritzie-Hernandez. We were surprised and concerned that candidate Jorge Lerma – who knows better given his long history of involvement in Oakland politics and failed 2020 campaign for this same seat – had not yet filed. We knew from social media posts that he had held at least two campaign fundraising events, and that he had purchased lawn signs and other campaign materials, so why did he not file his form 460 as required?

Now we have a much fuller picture of what happened. Mr. Lerma, contrary to state and local law, was using his 2020 campaign to raise and spend funds instead of using his 2023 campaign as is required. It is important to understand that each election is completely separate, and the fact that an individual ran a campaign in the past does not mean that they can just use that same campaign account to run in the future, as clearly laid out by the City of Oakland Public Ethics Commission.¹⁸

The Oakland Public Ethics Commission is an extremely helpful resource to candidates (as well as to the public), and every candidate is given information about resources that they have created to help first time (and repeat) candidates comply with the campaign rules which maintain the integrity of our electoral system. They even have an entire page entitled “Starting your Campaign” which walks candidates through the process, step by step.

Mr Lerma is not a first-time candidate, he ran (unsuccessfully) for the district 5 seat in 2020, so he knows the rules. During his 2020 campaign, Mr Lerma filed all of his disclosures on time without a problem. Mr Lerma also has an experienced Treasurer working on both his 2020 and 2023 campaigns. Jose Dorado is a tax accounting specialist who is listed as the campaign treasurer not just for Mr Lerma’s 2 campaigns, but also the campaign treasurer for the “Re-elect Noel Gallo for Oakland City Council 2016” campaign,¹⁹ It is impossible to believe (and highly disturbing if it were believed) that they did not know the rules for campaign finance.

Had Mr Lerma and his treasurer been truly confused about whether they could raise and spend money for 2023 through the 2020 campaign with the old FPPC, they would have simply filed the form 460 for that 2020 campaign ON TIME when due on 9/28/2023 as he had done for every 460 filed by the 2020 campaign in the past. Mr Lerma cannot claim ignorance of the law now when he had previously complied appropriately.

In addition, Mr Lerma (prior to anyone having any idea of what was happening) transferred funds from the 2020 campaign account to a different account presumably set up for the 2023 campaign on September 21, 2023. The ONLY reason for the campaign to do that was because they knew that it was illegal to use the 2020 campaign account for the 2023 campaign. At that point, given there was campaign activity in the 2023 campaign account, Mr Lerma should have filed the 2023 campaign form 460 on September 28, 2023 when it was due. The fact that he did not do so makes clear that this was not his ignorance but his desire to keep his contributors hidden as long as possible so that voters were not aware that his campaign was financed largely by those connected to the charter school and privatization industry.

Mr Lerma, when he ran in 2020, was not the “charter industry” candidate. He was not supported by the various Bloomberg and charter founder Jerry Brown funded PACs – that candidate was Leroy Gaines, who also lost the election. Mr Lerma knows that being supported by charter leaders and polticos who support charter schools and closing schools (which has proven to be very unpopular with voters) is not likely to help him win this seat the second time around. He could have just declined the support of those charter supporters, but he apparently decided instead to hide his financial backers by funneling contributions through his old campaign. The only campaigns required to file the 9/28/2023 disclosure are those vying for the November election, so absent all of this illegal campaign activity, the 2020 Lerma campaign would not have had to disclose all of these contributors. Once they were caught, they had no choice but to file the disclosures, and so we now can see clearly what the intent of this shell game of campaign finance was all about: ensuring that voters did not have the important information about who was financing his campaign until it was too late to make a difference. Unfortunately, we noticed, and the Oakland Ethics Department will notice. Mr Lerma must not be rewarded for his unethical behavior.

1. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/RequestPDF.aspx?id=208542770 ↩︎
2. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/RequestPDF.aspx?id=208660150 ↩︎
3. https://www.eventcreate.com/e/jorgelermamixer ↩︎
4. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jorge-lerma-014ab189_ousd-community-schools-activity-7105903190688112640-bN8k?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop ↩︎
5. https://www.facebook.com/samdavis99/posts/pfbid02VDkgpEJg7dz2MFf4W4MoscgPz3y66vsxDxYaQdJPXkHXgr5kbdLtFQvXtzdtx73al ↩︎
6. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/RequestPDF.aspx?id=208674687 ↩︎
7. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/AllFilingsByFiler.aspx?id=189891640 ↩︎
8. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/RequestPDF.aspx?id=208660150 ↩︎
9. https://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1463520; date confirmed by Secretary of State’s office by phone ↩︎
10. https://ousdparentsunited.com/2023/10/17/ousd-district-5-candidate-continues-to-spend-campaign-funds-without-disclosing-its-source-that-is-against-the-law-and-should-disqualify-him-from-the-office/ ↩︎
11. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/RequestPDF.aspx?id=208674687 ↩︎
12. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/RequestPDF.aspx?id=208681958 ↩︎
13. see image posted below ↩︎
14. https://secure.actblue.com/donate/jorge-lerma-for-school-board-2023 accessed 10/22/2023 at 3:15pm, see image posted below ↩︎
15. https://x.com/ParentsUniteOak/status/1711781089243718096?s=20 ↩︎
16. https://time.com/5792383/michael-bloomberg-charter-schools-donations/ ↩︎
17. https://ousdparentsunited.com/2020/10/09/show-me-the-money/ ↩︎
18. https://cao-94612.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/documents/OCRA-Guide-2022-FINAL-REVISED-4-20-22.pdf ↩︎
19. https://public.netfile.com/Pub2/RequestPDF.aspx?id=161825762 ↩︎

In our last post, we called on Mr Lerma to finally file the form 460 for his campaign committee “Jorge Lerma for Oakland School Board 2023” that was due on September 28, 2023 so that the public could see who was supporting his campaign and paying for all of the campaign materials, including a USPS mailer, that we knew that the campaign had created. Shortly after that post came out, Mr Lerma’s campaign did file a Form 460, and we learned that, according to that form, he had NO contributors and NO expenditures to report. Wait, what? How can that be true when we know that he has spent significant amounts of money and held several fundraising campaign events?

Well, it seems that Mr Lerma has been hiding all of his contributions and his expenditures by using the account for his failed 2020 campaign to raise and spend money for his 2023 campaign, which is a serious violation of campaign finance law. Before Mr Lerma declared he would run in the 2023 special election, the 2020 campaign balance was $5,391.99. On September 21, 2023, the 2020 Campaign transferred $12,927.15 to the 2023 campaign, meaning that the 2020 campaign had $7,535 more than 3 months earlier. That $7,535 likely represents the difference between the contributions received for the 2023 campaign less the expenditures for the 2023 campaign such as lawn signs, door hangers, lit pieces, fundraising costs and of course the mailer that was sent via US mail. That $7,535 in transferred funds was improperly raised using an old campaign account, and those contributions and expenditures lack transparency because an old campaign account is not subject to the same reporting laws as a campaign for an upcoming election would be.

So what does all this mean? It means that we are 2 1/2 weeks away from this special election and Mr Lerma’s 2023 campaign has not disclosed a single contributor to his campaign. That is important information that voters need to properly cast their ballots, and the fact that Mr Lerma is trying so hard to hide it tells us that he likely has supporters he doesn’t want voters to know about.

It also means that Mr Lerma has certainly committed multiple violations of electoral reporting and disclosure laws, by:

• Failing to timely file a Form 410 “Statement of Organization Recipient Committee” within 10 days of reaching the qualification threshold – due 8/21/2023 but not filed until 10/12/2023 (two days after Parents United first commented on the campaign disclosure violations)
• Failing to timely file a Form 460 “Recipient Committee Campaign Statement” for 7/1/2023 through 9/23/2023 – due 9/28/2023 but not filed until 10/17/2023, and without including any of the 2023 campaign contributors or expenditures
• Failing to disclose ANY campaign contributions towards his 2023 campaign
• Failing to disclose ANY expenditures of his 2023 campaign
• Sending a mailer through the United States Postal Service without a proper California Fair Political Practices Act (“FPPC”) number for the 2023 campaign
• Using an improper FPPC number on his website, donation site, and possibly other materials in order to induce campaign contributions to his 2023 campaign that he thereafter failed to disclose as required by law
• Using an improper FPPC number on a campaign mailer sent through the United States Postal Service, intended to induce voters to believe that he had a valid political campaign and induce support for that campaign

But perhaps most importantly, it demonstrates that Mr Lerma is not fit to be elected to the Oakland Unified School Board on November 7, 2023. Mr Lerma has shown us that he does not feel bound to follow the laws that all others, including his opponent, are bound by. He shows a total lack of concern for the transparency, fairness and accountability that we should expect from our elected leaders. Mr Lerma has demonstrated that he does not feel obligated to exercise the fiscal responsibility that is a key component of a school board member’s job. Given these clear and serious ethical violations, Mr Lerma should immediately suspend his campaign for school board in District 5, apologize to the voters and begin to clean up the ethical mess he has created.