When most people think about a local election, they think about the candidates.

Who is running? What do they believe? Who should I vote for?

But after becoming involved in Culver City politics, I have learned that there is another layer that voters may not see as clearly:

the organizations surrounding the candidates.

Political action committees, nonprofits, Democratic clubs, unions, business interests, neighborhood organizations and other groups can endorse candidates, communicate with voters, raise money and—in some circumstances—spend money attempting to influence elections.

That doesn't automatically make any of these organizations good or bad.

But voters should know who they are, what they advocate, whom they support, and—when disclosure laws apply—where their political money comes from and where it goes.

Welcome to Episode 25 of The Strange World of Politics.

First: A PAC and a Nonprofit Are Not the Same Thing

This distinction is extremely important.

A Political Action Committee, or PAC, is organized to participate in politics through activities such as raising contributions, making political expenditures, supporting or opposing candidates, or participating in ballot-measure campaigns.

California actually has several different kinds of political committees.

A recipient committee generally becomes subject to California reporting requirements when it receives enough money for political purposes to meet the statutory threshold.

An independent expenditure committee spends money supporting or opposing candidates without coordinating that spending with those candidates.

A major donor committee can arise when an individual, company or organization contributes substantial amounts of money to political committees.

A nonprofit organization is different.

Some nonprofits primarily conduct advocacy, education or community organizing. Depending upon their tax classification and political activity, they may also become subject to campaign-disclosure requirements.

That is why voters should look beyond labels.

Don't stop at:

"They're a nonprofit."

Or:

"They're a PAC."

Ask:

What does the organization actually do?

Meet Some of the Organizations in Culver City Politics

Culver City Coalition

The Culver City Coalition identifies itself as a grassroots, resident-driven Political Action Committee dedicated to "Good Governance, Transparency, and Common Sense."

Its website identifies the organization as:

FPPC #1446843.

That number matters.

Think of an FPPC committee number almost like a tracking number for political money. It allows voters to distinguish one committee from another and follow its filings over time.

The Culver City Coalition has participated directly in Culver City political advocacy.

In the 2024 election, it urged residents to support Albert Vera, Jeannine Wisnosky Stehlin and Denice Renteria.

It has also published strongly critical material concerning Yasmine-Imani McMorrin, Bryan "Bubba" Fish, Freddy Puza, the Culver City Democratic Club and Our Culver.

That does not automatically make what it publishes right or wrong.

It means voters should understand who is speaking when they read the message.

How Much Money Are We Talking About?

This is where political organizations become much more interesting.

The Culver City Coalition's own donation page has displayed an annual fundraising goal of $10,000 and showed $4,965 raised when the page was captured.

But that number should not be confused with the organization's total historical campaign receipts.

A fundraising thermometer on a website is not an FPPC campaign statement.

That is why the public filings matter.

And once you start looking at those filings, Culver City's political history becomes much easier to understand.

A Real Example: The Culver City Coalition and 2022 Money

One of the clearest examples comes from the 2022 election.

A Form 461 filed by Hackman-related interests shows that on July 2, 2022, the Culver City Coalition received a $1,000 monetary contribution through an affiliated entity, The Culver Studios Owner LLC.

More importantly, that filing reports a cumulative amount of $6,000 related to the Culver City Coalition at that point.

Later in the election, another transaction appears.

On October 18, 2022, the Alliance for Culver City to Support Renteria and O'Brien for City Council 2022, a committee sponsored by Culver Studios/Hackman interests, reportedly contributed $10,000 to the Culver City Coalition.

That is real political money.

But here is where responsible reporting matters.

Those contributions establish that money was contributed.

They do not, by themselves, prove that Hackman controlled the Culver City Coalition, dictated its positions, or coordinated every political decision it made.

Those would require additional evidence.

That distinction is essential.

And the Numbers Got Much Larger Elsewhere

The same 2022 filing provides an extraordinary example of how large outside political spending can become even in a relatively small city.

On September 12, 2022, The Culver Studios Owner LLC made a $175,000 contribution to:

Alliance for Culver City to Support the Election of Denice Renteria and Dan O'Brien for City Council 2022.

The filing reports a cumulative amount associated with that committee of $585,783.13.

Stop for a moment and think about that number:

$585,783.13

In a municipal election in a city of roughly 40,000 people.

That does not mean the candidates themselves received $585,783 personally.

It does not mean their own candidate committees raised that amount.

And it does not automatically establish coordination between the outside committee and the candidates.

It means a separate political committee supporting those candidates was associated with more than half a million dollars in reported political activity in the filing.

That is exactly the kind of distinction voters need to understand when someone says:

"Candidate X had hundreds of thousands of dollars behind them."

Ask:

Whose committee was it?

Was it the candidate's own committee?

A PAC?

An independent expenditure committee?

A union?

A corporation?

A nonprofit?

A major donor?

Those are completely different things.

A Simple Money Map

Here are some examples that show why the details matter:

The $18,400 figure for Our Culver comes from a public database aggregating Culver City campaign-finance filings and should still be checked against the underlying original forms when doing detailed research.

That last sentence is important.

Aggregators are useful. Original filings are better.

Be Careful: Similar Names Can Be Completely Different Organizations

Here's another lesson I learned while researching this episode.

There is Our Culver.

But campaign records also contain a completely different committee with the similar name:

"Our Culver City in Support of Al Vera, Denice Renteria and Jeannine Wisnosky Stehlin for City Council 2024."

Those are not necessarily the same organization.

The latter appears as a separately identified political committee in Culver City's campaign-finance records.

This is why searching only by words can be dangerous.

Imagine seeing:

Our Culver

and

Our Culver City

and simply assuming they're the same organization.

They may not be.

This is another reason FPPC identification numbers matter.

When you're investigating money, identify:

Exact committee name
FPPC number
Treasurer
Reporting period

before assuming two records belong to the same organization.

Now Look at Our Culver

On another side of Culver City's political landscape is Our Culver.

Its website describes it as a community organization and prominently states:

"Paid for by Our Culver, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit. Not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate."

Our Culver also openly advocates on Culver City policy issues.

Its website discusses affordable housing, transportation, Flock cameras, homelessness and other local issues.

And it participates in candidate endorsements.

That makes it part of Culver City's political ecosystem even though its organizational structure differs from that of the Culver City Coalition.

Again:

organizational structure and political influence are not the same thing.

Then There Is the Culver City Democratic Club

The Culver City Democratic Club represents another model entirely.

It is a partisan political organization that openly endorses Democratic candidates and participates in election activity.

Campaign-finance records show that the Club has been a recurring participant in Culver City's political-finance system.

For example, historical filings examined through public records show thousands of dollars in annual contributions and expenditures during previous reporting periods.

It also has a federal PAC registration with the Federal Election Commission, where it is identified as an active unauthorized PAC.

So once again, the lesson is not:

"PAC bad."

or

"nonprofit bad."

The lesson is:

Know what kind of organization you're looking at.

Politics Requires Money

Running political organizations costs money.

Websites cost money.

Mailers cost money.

Advertising costs money.

Text messages cost money.

Consultants cost money.

Signs cost money.

Digital advertising costs money.

Polling costs money.

Events cost money.

Reaching thousands of voters costs money.

So whenever you receive political material, get into the habit of looking for:

"Paid for by"

California political advertising rules require disclosure language in many circumstances, and Culver City specifically warns that failure to include required "Paid for by" disclosures is among the most common political-advertising violations.

That tiny line at the bottom of a mailer can sometimes tell you more than the giant headline on top.

Follow the Money—But Do It Fairly

"Follow the money" is sometimes used as though discovering a contribution proves corruption.

It doesn't.

People, unions, corporations, nonprofits and political organizations are legally permitted to participate in politics subject to applicable laws.

A contribution tells you:

money moved.

It does not automatically prove:

a vote was purchased,
a candidate was controlled,
a government contract was exchanged,
or improper coordination occurred.

The better questions are:

Who gave the money?

How much?

Who received it?

When?

What did the recipient do with it?

Who ultimately received payments?

Was the spending for or against a candidate?

Was it an independent expenditure?

Was the candidate involved?

Do the same donors repeatedly appear?

Then let the evidence lead you where it leads.

The Forms Every Culver City Voter Should Know

You don't have to become a campaign treasurer.

But learn these numbers.

Form 410 — Statement of Organization

Think of it as the committee's political identification document.

It helps establish:

the committee's name,
FPPC identification number,
treasurer,
type of committee,
and organizational information.

Form 460 — Recipient Committee Campaign Statement

For ordinary voters, this may be the most useful form.

This is where you can often see:

money received,
contributors,
payments made,
vendors,
cash balances,
loans,
debts,
and other financial activity.

If you're investigating political money, start here.

Form 461 — Major Donor and Independent Expenditure Committee Statement

This can reveal major donors and independent political expenditures.

The Hackman example discussed above came from this type of filing.

Form 496 — Independent Expenditure Report

This can reveal certain independent spending supporting or opposing candidates or measures.

Form 497 — Contribution Report

This provides rapid disclosure of certain large or late contributions when California law requires expedited reporting.

Culver City's campaign-rules page links directly to FPPC campaign disclosure resources and explains these filing requirements.

Here Is Exactly How YOU Can Investigate Culver City Political Money

This might be the most important section of this entire episode.

You don't have to believe me.

You don't have to believe the Culver City Coalition.

You don't have to believe Our Culver.

You don't have to believe the Democratic Club.

You don't have to believe another candidate.

Look at the records yourself.

Step 1 — Go to Culver City's website

Navigate to:

City Hall → Election Information → Fair Political Practices Commission Required Reporting

The City maintains a dedicated page for campaign disclosure information.

Step 2 — Find this heading

Campaign Contribution and Expenditure Disclosure Electronic Filing System Public Access Portal

That is the doorway.

The City specifically says voters can use the portal to:

research campaign contributions and expenditures,
review campaign statements filed by candidates,
and examine a committee's filing history.

Step 3 — Search the exact committee name

For example:

Culver City Coalition

Then confirm:

FPPC #1446843

Do not rely solely on the words in the name.

Step 4 — Find the Form 410

Use it to confirm that you have the correct organization.

Check the committee's:

name
ID number
treasurer
address
committee type

Step 5 — Open the Form 460s

This is where the investigation really starts.

Look at:

Contributions

Who gave?

How much?

When?

What was the contributor's occupation or employer, if disclosed?

Then look at:

Expenditures

Who got paid?

How much?

What was the payment for?

Was it:

mail?
advertising?
consulting?
legal services?
polling?
digital advertising?

Step 6 — Look for Forms 496 and 497

These can help identify activity occurring close to Election Day.

Step 7 — Compare multiple reporting periods

Don't look at one filing and stop.

Political money is a movie, not a photograph.

One filing might contain:

January through June.

Another:

July through September.

Another:

the weeks immediately before the election.

Put them together.

What If You Can't Find the Filing?

This is important.

Public does not always mean easy to find.

Culver City says campaign statements in its possession that are not available through the online system may be requested through a public-records request.

The City also states that campaign disclosure statements from before 2020 can be found through its NextRequest system under Request No. 24-726.

And if you're confused, call the City Clerk:

Culver City City Clerk's Office
(310) 253-5851
elections@culvercity.gov

There is nothing wrong with asking:

"I'm a voter. Can you show me where I can see the campaign filings for this committee?"

That is exactly what public disclosure is for.

Form 700 Is Something Different

Readers who followed Episode 22 may remember my discussion of Form 700.

That is different.

Form 700 is the Statement of Economic Interests.

It concerns certain financial interests of public officials and candidates.

So think about it this way:

Form 410/460/496/497

Where is political money coming from and going?

Form 700

What reportable financial interests does this candidate or public official have?

Both are valuable.

They simply answer different questions.

Culver City notes that since January 1, 2025, officials subject to Government Code Section 87200 file Form 700 directly with the FPPC, where those filings can be searched publicly.

Why This Matters So Much in Culver City

Culver City is a relatively small city.

According to the city's campaign-finance database, there are roughly 29,000 registered voters.

That means several thousand dollars can matter.

Ten thousand dollars can matter.

One hundred thousand dollars can matter.

And more than half a million dollars of outside political activity is an enormous amount in the context of a local election.

Organizations can:

publish articles,
send mailers,
make videos,
buy advertisements,
organize volunteers,
endorse candidates,
hold events,
create voter guides,
fund opposition research,
and communicate repeatedly with voters.

A voter might encounter these messages without realizing that multiple communications came from organized political entities.

That's why the disclosure matters.

My Challenge to Culver City Voters

During this election, when somebody tells you:

"Candidate X is controlled by developers."

Look at the records.

When somebody says:

"Candidate Y is controlled by unions."

Look at the records.

When somebody says:

"We're just a grassroots community organization."

Look at the organization.

And when somebody says:

"This group represents Culver City residents."

Ask:

Who runs it?

Who pays for it?

Who does it endorse?

What does it spend money on?

Is it a nonprofit?

Is it a PAC?

Does it have an FPPC number?

Who is its treasurer?

Who are its biggest donors?

And when I tell you something about campaign finance:

Look me up too.

Candidates file these disclosures.

Transparency shouldn't be something we demand only from people on the other political side.

It should apply to everyone.

Don't Follow the Accusation. Follow the Documents.

This may be one of the most important lessons I have learned while running for office.

Culver City has political organizations on different sides.

Each has its own version of events.

One organization criticizes another.

The progressive side talks about developers and corporate money.

The moderate or conservative side talks about unions and progressive political organizations.

Candidates criticize one another.

Supporters repeat those claims.

Social media amplifies everything.

But voters have something better than political accusations:

Documents.

Look at the Form 410.

Read the Form 460.

Read the Form 461.

Check the Form 496.

Check the Form 497.

Look at the contributors.

Look at the expenditures.

Look at the dates.

Follow the committee ID numbers.

And then make up your own mind.

Because democracy works better when voters stop asking only:

"Who should I believe?"

and start asking:

"Where can I verify it?"

In Culver City politics, the answer is often sitting in a public record waiting for somebody to open it.

The Strange World of Politics — Episode 25