Students First! candidates spent more than $2,000 more in undergraduate student government campaign expenses than their opposing slate, Bruins United, according to an expense report published by the Elections Board on Tuesday.
Altogether, candidates spent $19,000 on the elections. Candidates who leave out expenses or lie about them risk being disqualified from the election or removed from office if elected.
Though expenses are organized by individual candidates, as a slate, Students First! spent $10,639 on campaign and signboard expenses, and Bruins United spent $8,093.
The candidates for commissioner who were running unopposed did not spend any money, but the two candidates for president who signed a voluntary spending limit adhered to the $600 cap.
Tina Park, Students First! campaign manager and current Undergraduate Students Association Council external vice president, said the candidates shared expenses, and she estimated about 70 to 80 percent of her candidates’ budgets consist of donations.
She said the Elections Code mandates donations to be listed by market value, which is averaged by taking the price of materials from two businesses.
She said the materials cost more because of the slate’s mission to use sweatshop-free materials, which she said tend to be more expensive.
Park said the Students First! candidates appear to have larger budgets because her reports were more detailed, accounting for all the materials involved.
“(We) were really thorough in computing expenses (and) included everything,” she said.
Joline Price, the campaign manager for Bruins United, did not return phone calls Tuesday, but Gabe Rose, Bruins United presidential candidate, said his slate tried to be fiscally responsible.
He said Bruins United candidates shared expenses, so the published numbers are “deceptive” since the total cost is for 10 candidates. Park encouraged students to examine the expense account reports in the Elections Board office, since they are public record.
“(Students First! is) completely transparent. … We have nothing to hide from students,” she said.
While representatives from the slates said there were expenses involved in publicizing their campaign, other candidates said it was possible to run without a large budget.
Independent presidential candidate Dave Valk said he spent about $310 on a Web site and signboard on Bruin Walk.
“The argument is that (candidates) need money to run a fair campaign to get elected. … If I won, it would show it’s not true.”
Valk said he hosted a party on Saturday to set an example, which he did not include in his expenses, as it was unrelated to his presidential campaign.
Another candidate who spent less than slate candidates was Jose Manaiza, True Bruins presidential candidate, who said he spent about $363 on his campaign.
He said he signed the voluntary spending cap because he wanted to have a “clean campaign.”
He said he believes there are better uses for the money spent on campaigns.
“I believe they should invest the money in more productive things … (such as) helping the homeless in Westwood,” he said. “It is not effective to spend so much money on a campaign for just one week.”
Rose said it is “easy to criticize” slates for their high budgets, but the alternative would mean they would be unable to get their message out to students.
“(It) takes a lot of resources,” he said.
He said the alternative is that USAC could subsidize the election costs, but he said it was unlikely that students would be interested in such a plan.