Daniel Lurie has done it again: Between Tuesday and Thursday, the Levi Strauss heir dropped another $1,305,000 into his campaign for the mayor’s office, according to newly released filings.
That follows $1.6 million in contributions Lurie made to himself earlier in August, bringing his total fundraising to $4.3 million. Of that, $3.48 million is self-financed — 81 percent.
After this recent donation, the total money raised in San Francisco’s November elections stands at roughly $28.9 million.
Lurie, who also founded the homelessness nonprofit Tipping Point, is far and away leading the pack in fundraising: Mayor London Breed has raised about $1.85 million, Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin has raised some $1.1 million, District 11 Supervisor Ahsha Safaí has $980,000, and Mark Farrell another $950,000.
Lurie’s war chest is almost entirely from his own pocket, however. All of the major candidates have given to their own campaigns, but they have done so up to the $500 city contribution cap (or less — Safaí has only given $150 to his own committee).
Candidates are allowed to put as much money as they want into their races, but doing so limits how much they can receive in public financing. San Francisco matches small-dollar donations from city residents six-to-one.
Lurie is the wealthiest contender in this race and can afford to pour millions into the contest, unlike all his opponents. Farrell, from his time as a venture capitalist, has amassed at least $10 million in investments but perhaps more, while Peskin has a substantial number of technology investments and properties worth millions.
San Francisco’s public disclosure forms go up to a top value of “over $1,000,000” for investments, properties and other holdings. That means the public can only get a floor of public officials’ wealth, but do not know how much they own total.
Lurie has said his self-financing is an attempt to save the city money in public financing. Lurie’s team did not comment on the recent giving, but last week, his campaign manager said Lurie was “the hardest working candidate out there” in response to questions about Lurie’s spending.
“Daniel is committed to sharing his vision for changing the broken status quo at City Hall,” the campaign manager, Han Zou, said. “He hasn’t spent the last 20 years running for office like his opponents, but it’s clear voters see that as an asset.”
As of June 30, the latest date for which spending is available, Lurie had shelled out $1.1 million from his campaign coffers, largely on staff and consultants.
Lurie is also bolstered by millions more in an independent political action committee that has fundraised some $5.5 million. That, too, is benefitting from inherited wealth: His mother, Miriam “Mimi” Haas, earlier this year put $1 million into the PAC, and his brother, Ari Lurie, has given $100,000 to it.
The pro-Lurie PAC has spent some $2.4 million ensuring Lurie becomes a household name, a requirement in a race where he is the only major candidate who has never held public office. The PAC has bought space on ubiquitous “Believe in Clean Sidewalks and Safe Streets” billboards featuring Lurie, TV slots, ads in Chinese-language media, and direct mail touting “Democrat Daniel Lurie for Mayor.”
The political action committee has also taken in vast sums from other well-heeled donors — $500,000 from WhatsApp co-founder Jan Koum, $250,000 from biotech investor Oleg Nodelman, $249,000 from the family of the founder of investment firm Engine No. 1 Christopher James, and many more.
The most frequent occupations listed among the PAC’s donors? “Investor” and “CEO.”
Imagine the incredible, generational change almost $4 million would make for most families, even in San Francisco.
What a gross display of wealth from the heir of a company that takes such terrible advantage of its workers world wide.
The spoiled little boy is spending some of his allowance to help his mommy boy him the mayorship.
This is just one of the many things that’s gross about absurd wealth.
Already seeing tired of seeing his name and face everywhere. There’s a distinct difference between strategic marketing to build name recognition and tout one’s qualifications then there’s plastering your name and face is the every crevice of the city with ill-placed signage as a means to wins votes. Go away already, Daniel.
i never want to see another billionaire elected to office.