Voice of OC reported this morning that Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido’s long-time political consultant Dennis DeSnoo maxed out in a first time campaign contribution of $1,900 to DA Tony Rackauckas two months after Voice of OC exposed his property swap which ultimately led him to be placed him under investigation by Santa Ana city Attorney Sonia Carvalho. As icing on this ethics mud pie, other Pulido allies also suddenly gave to Rackauckas according to the Voice of OC Report.
In fact, the Jan. 22 contribution marked the first time in nearly 10 years that DeSnoo has given to any candidate for countywide office and the first time ever for DA, according to Shirley Grindle, the county’s campaign finance watchdog.
Other Pulido allies giving to Rackauckas’ campaign this year include a developer and his wife, a car dealer, and the wife of a well-healed client of the mayor’s consulting business. And Al Stokke, the criminal defense attorney Pulido hired to advise him on the property swap issue, is also a longtime campaign contributor to Rackauckas.
All told, Rackauckas this year received $5,000 from these folks as of this month. DeSnoo and Stokke would not comment. Others who were reached insisted their contributions were not made on Pulido’s behalf.
The contributions to DA Rackauckas, amounting to only $5,000 of the more than $214,000 that the DA spent on his re-election campaign, is not a lot by any measure. We are skeptical that a few bucks could influence or esteemed District Attorney to torpedo a criminal investigation, but stranger things have happened before as the Voice of OC reported today.
It’s relationships similar to these – and in particular Rackauckas’ ties with Stokke — that the Orange County Grand Jury highlighted in a 2002 report that accused Rackauckas of intervening in cases involving campaign contributors at the donors’ behest.
So as the Board of Supervisors considers approval of its response to the Orange County Grand Jury call for an independent Ethics Commission, which characterizes such a body as “not warranted” and “not reasonable,” we suggest they consider these new revelations as one more example of exactly why an independent commission is warranted. The public cannot trust a DA to watch the hen-house, when he is more a fox than watch dog.
Good article, Eddie. (May I call you “Eddie” for short?)
I hadn’t checked the final figures — Racky really spent over $1.00 a vote to beat me? Great — that’s money of his that otherwise would have gone to worse use. I think that I spent around a nickel per vote.
We badly need an ethics commission. Badly.
You clown. You never had a prayer
NotPedrozasPRFirm is just being mean. I don’t know Greg and I have nothing against him. Let me show you how to twist the knife……
You lost to that hack……….. Wow
Can you tell I am not a huge fan of the DA…..
I think T-Rack spent the money he was going to spend anyway. I don’t think he spent any more or any less than he usually does but I do know that no one considered Diamond a threat.