Nonprofit founder and Levi-Strauss heir Daniel Lurie has cut a series of six and seven-figure checks for his mayoral campaign, making full use of his family’s jean empire as he pitches himself as a City Hall outsider.
But the big bucks Lurie has funneled toward his bid contrast starkly with the amount he has received from donors lately.
Between July 1 and Sept. 21 — the latest fundraising benchmark through required financial disclosure forms — Lurie collected $69,458 from donors.
That was far less than his main opponents, Mayor London Breed, former interim Mayor Mark Farrell, and Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin.
As of Friday, Lurie, the founder of Tipping Point, an anti-poverty nonprofit, had injected some $6.28 million of his own cash into the race. That included a cool $925,000 he contributed this week.
If that weren’t enough, he has an independent committee, anchored by a large donation from his mother, Mimi Haas, backing his candidacy with millions more.
Peskin — who has been lagging in the polls and launched his campaign in April, the latest of all the candidates — had the most robust grassroots fundraising haul of the period, bringing in $253,433. Farrell raised $177,360, while Breed got $147,219.
All the candidates, besides Lurie, are set to receive up to $1.2 million in public financing.
Political consultant Jim Ross said Lurie’s figures are likely the result of two key developments: The campaign is not focusing on fundraising, and voters see a rich candidate who already has immense resources.
Lurie has focused on distinguishing himself from the other candidates, who have all served in public office. He promises to take on City Hall corruption, build shelters for the homeless population, and fully staff the San Francisco Police Department.
More recently, he has jumped on scandals that have befallen Breed’s signature Dream Keeper Initiative and Farrell’s reported ethical missteps.
“What happens with wealthy candidates is it becomes hard to raise money because nobody thinks they need it,” said Ross. “They tend to lean on wealthy candidates’ finances, which is a problem because donations are really an indication of not just money but strength and support.”
Lurie has been on a spending spree — a necessity considering that just a year ago, many San Franciscans barely knew his name.
Since entering the race last fall, Lurie has spent $3.5 million at political media firm Thematic Campaigns, $213,000 on polling from David Binder, and more than $100,000 on opposition research from VR Research.
Max Szabo, a spokesperson for Lurie’s campaign, said the candidate still has a large pool of donors and has raised a total of about $900,000 from more than 2,900 contributors. Lurie has consistently polled in the top three and has high favorability ratings among prospective voters.
Meanwhile, Peskin’s latest fundraising figures are a beacon of hope for the progressive candidate, who has been polling last among the top four candidates.
Running on a platform critical of real estate and big-business interests, Peskin has banked his mayoral bid on a grassroots effort that hinges on a coalition of young progressives and moderate homeowners who balk at increased development.
While Peskin’s campaign is in the top spot during this fundraising period, it has $175,162 cash on hand — considerably less than the other campaigns, which all have north of half a million.
“Aaron is running a grassroots campaign and has no billionaire backers and no deep pockets,” said Jim Stearns, a consultant for Peskin’s campaign. “We’re not going to put our faith in polling. We’re going to march down the field confident in the reception we’re getting on the ground.”