Candidates and slates in the upcoming undergraduate student government election spent a total of $12,073 on their campaigns, considerably less than the $25,270 spent in last year’s election.
Two full slates are running candidates in the Undergraduate Students Association Council election, a drop from the three main slates and 30 candidates that competed last year. Bruins United and LET’S ACT! each have 10 candidates running for their respective slates. FIRED UP!, a slate present in last year’s election, was disqualified from running in the election after four slate members submitted their candidate applications late. The After Party, a one-membered slate represented by Jason Ergina, is also participating.
Each candidate in Bruins United is estimated to spend $842 on average and each LET’S ACT! candidate spent about $156, according to the expense reports compiled by the USAC Election Board. None of the independent candidates spent money on their campaigns except for J. Cesar Flores, a transfer student representative candidate, who spent $300 of his own money on fliers. The one candidate representing The After Party, Jason Ergina, did not spend money.
Each LET’S ACT! candidate spent about $700 less than the average Bruins United candidate, one of the largest gaps seen in recent history.
Community Service Commissioner Cynthia Wong spent $140 on fliers for a referendum to increase mandatory student fees for the USAC contingency, Associated Students UCLA programming and Community Activities Committee funds.
This year is the first time candidates had to adhere to the new regulations proposed by the Election Board in February, including mandatory spending caps and slate registration. Slates are groups of students who run candidates together on similar platforms and pool their resources, similar to political parties.
For this spring election, the cap was placed at $850 for executive candidates and $750 for nonexecutive candidates, said Election Board Chair Shagun Kabra. The new Election code drew a distinction between slate and candidate spending. Each slate can spend $200 for each candidate with a maximum of $2,000 spent per slate, Kabra said. The funds spent by slates had to go toward the entire slate’s campaign and not just one candidate, Kabra added.
In previous elections, candidates could spend as much as they wanted on their campaigns.
The Bruins United slate spent an estimated total of $7,010, and funds spent by candidates were also considered to be part of the funds spent by the slate. The fliers, shirts, phone wallets, condoms, toilet paper, stickers, photos and Home Depot items the candidates spent money on were not personal and could be attributed to the entire slate. The only exception were the individual banners for each candidate. Bruins United bought the condoms and toilet paper for giveaways, said Zoe Sheppard, a Bruins United campaign manager.
The funds spent by LET’S ACT! did not overlap with the funds spent by individual candidates, however. The LET’S ACT! slate spent a total of $1,973.40 to purchase 7,000 fliers and 162 T-shirts.
In total, slate and candidate spending for Bruins United added up to around $8,240. Slate and candidate spending for LET’S ACT! added up to about $3,533.
Slate and candidate spending were not separated in previous elections. Last year, the amounts spent by the entire Bruins United and LET’S ACT! campaigns were $10,200 and $6,650, respectively.
Almost all Bruins United candidates were self-funded, with an average of about $800 each. Matthew Stephens Hezlep, a general representative candidate, was an exception, receiving a $600 donation from current USAC President Avinoam Baral.
In the past, Bruins United candidates financed their campaigns with donations and sponsorships, but in the spring election, there was only one corporate sponsorship, said Sheppard.
Bruins United received one sponsorship this year from Blueprint LSAT Preparation, Sheppard said. Candidates in Bruins United are tasked with finding sponsorships, and in this election, most candidates used money saved up from their jobs, Sheppard added.
In December, emails leaked to The Bruin showed that some Bruins United candidates had secretly received donations from pro-Israel donors in at least the two previous elections. The leak spurred controversy in USAC over campaign funding transparency.
All of the funds for LET’S ACT! candidates came from donations from friends and family, said Kristine de los Santos, a campaign manager for LET’S ACT!
Because several LET’S ACT! candidates said they are from low-income backgrounds, some candidates, such as general representative candidate Jaimeson Cortez and Cultural Affairs commissioner candidate Amy Shao received donations from the parents of other LET’S ACT! candidates, de los Santos added.
Online voting begins on MyUCLA on Monday at 2 p.m. and ends Friday at 3 p.m.