2008 Woodie Awards
Bond E campaigners spent $483,300 to win
Michael Brown
Issue date: 3/19/08 Section: News
Bond measure E's landslide victory on Feb. 5 by a margin of 73-27 percent was a surprise to many, but campaign manager Robert Garcia never doubted the college's prospects for gaining voter approval.
The bond needed 55 percent voter approval to pass.
Garcia, one of the architects behind the marketing of the $440 million bond, said, "The margin surprised me, but the win didn't. People like supporting LBCC because everyone in the community is tied to this campus in some way."
Passing the bond had a hefty price tag. Garcia said $483,300 in contributions were received, of which $250,000 were contributed by the LBCC Associated Student Body.
2002's bond worth $176 million was passed with a budget of $300,000.
He added that nearly all of the money was exhausted and estimated expenses were not final as of Tuesday, March 18, due to final invoices not being in.
Preliminary numbers showed $247,031 going toward direct mail that consisted of campaign fliers and yard signs. $118,979 was used for campaign staff (treasurer, bond consultant, manager, support staff) and $42,470 for the bond's phone bank that was staffed by more than 20 LBCC students, alumni and employees at a time.
Garcia was paid $28,354 for his role, which wasn't in addition to his district salary. Garcia had to temporarily vacate his LBCC post as director of public and media relations due to laws barring college employees from using district resources to campaign.
Garcia was just a part of the brain-trust behind the bond's marketing. Tramutola, a full service political consulting firm, devised the bond's strategy. The marketing firm was faced with a monumental task due a short window it had in printing materials and garnering support.
The measure was approved by the board in November to be placed on the Feb. 5 ballot, but the push to win over voters had to wait until after the holidays.
"That worried us a bit," Garcia said. "Usually with campaigns, several months are required to effectively get the word out and convince people that your issue merits their support. The quick turnaround didn't deter us. We just worked harder."
Garcia added that members of the Board of Trustees and two full-time staff members as well as an intern all played a role in getting the bond approved.
Despite the disparity in funds used during the 2002 campaign and 2008, both bonds were similar in the way they were promoted. LBCC used Tramutola in 2002 as well.
Garcia said, "We just turned it up a few notches this time. Overall, everyone had a good feeling about the bond's prospects due to the success of the past strategy and how that played out."
The bond needed 55 percent voter approval to pass.
Garcia, one of the architects behind the marketing of the $440 million bond, said, "The margin surprised me, but the win didn't. People like supporting LBCC because everyone in the community is tied to this campus in some way."
Passing the bond had a hefty price tag. Garcia said $483,300 in contributions were received, of which $250,000 were contributed by the LBCC Associated Student Body.
2002's bond worth $176 million was passed with a budget of $300,000.
He added that nearly all of the money was exhausted and estimated expenses were not final as of Tuesday, March 18, due to final invoices not being in.
Preliminary numbers showed $247,031 going toward direct mail that consisted of campaign fliers and yard signs. $118,979 was used for campaign staff (treasurer, bond consultant, manager, support staff) and $42,470 for the bond's phone bank that was staffed by more than 20 LBCC students, alumni and employees at a time.
Garcia was paid $28,354 for his role, which wasn't in addition to his district salary. Garcia had to temporarily vacate his LBCC post as director of public and media relations due to laws barring college employees from using district resources to campaign.
Garcia was just a part of the brain-trust behind the bond's marketing. Tramutola, a full service political consulting firm, devised the bond's strategy. The marketing firm was faced with a monumental task due a short window it had in printing materials and garnering support.
The measure was approved by the board in November to be placed on the Feb. 5 ballot, but the push to win over voters had to wait until after the holidays.
"That worried us a bit," Garcia said. "Usually with campaigns, several months are required to effectively get the word out and convince people that your issue merits their support. The quick turnaround didn't deter us. We just worked harder."
Garcia added that members of the Board of Trustees and two full-time staff members as well as an intern all played a role in getting the bond approved.
Despite the disparity in funds used during the 2002 campaign and 2008, both bonds were similar in the way they were promoted. LBCC used Tramutola in 2002 as well.
Garcia said, "We just turned it up a few notches this time. Overall, everyone had a good feeling about the bond's prospects due to the success of the past strategy and how that played out."
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Hachiko
JR Salazar
posted 3/24/08 @ 10:17 PM PST
Hey, as long as it passed, you should not have any qualms whatsoever. Even I voted YES to E.
Post a Comment