The City Chimes In On Bernstein’s Campaign Law Violation

Allan Bernstein, ScofflawWe wrote last week about the apparent campaign law violation of Tustin City Council Candidate, Allan Bernstein. Bernstein, who has no previous civic experience, has been flouting a photo of himself sitting on the dais in the city council chambers under the City of Tustin Official Seal. This is a violation of campaign law and a complaint has been filed with the Orange County District Attorney’s Office. Unfortunately, the sole phone call I received from the DA’s office was from the wrong person. She did advise me that the investigations unit would be in touch. Pardon us if we don’t hold our breath.

We are not the only ones that have noted this egregious violation of the law. The Liberal OC recently wrote an article titled, “Is Tustin Council Candidate a Deceiving “Wannabe” — Yes“. The title of the article says it all. But, Dan Chmielewski goes on to bring up the issue of who gave Bernstein access to the dais in the first place. In our request for information to the city, the City Clerk’s office states they have no policy on who can access or sit on the dais. Really? So, I can just walk up to the front of the council chamber, daughter in tow, and have her snap pictures of me as I mug for the camera like a councilman? Hardly. There are reasons the Chief of Police, Scott Jordan, and several of Tustin’s finest attend the city council meetings. I suspect one of them is to chase people out of areas they don’t belong.

Yet, Bernstein had his photo taken like an invited guest. Whose guest? Do I really need to state the obvious?

Now it looks as if the city attorney has chimed in with an opinion of his own. In response to a complaint filed with the city clerk’s office, the city attorney issued the following statement:

It appears that the City Seal, or portions of the seal, appear in some election campaign materials.  The Tustin City Code prohibits the use of the City Logo, or any facsimile thereof, for purposes of supporting or opposing one’s election to City Council or other public office.  (It should be noted that the City Seal was also designated as a City Logo in Ordinance No. 1312.)
 
Tustin City Code section 1245 provides in its entirety as follows:
 
“No person shall use the city logo, or any facsimile thereof, for purposes of supporting or opposing the nomination or election to any city or other public office of himself or herself or any other person, or for purposes of supporting or opposing any ballot measure, nor include such city logo on any writing distributed for purposes of influencing the action of the electorate, or any part thereof, in any election. This section shall not be applicable to writings issued by the City of Tustin or the City Council as a whole pursuant to law.”
 
The candidates should also be aware that use of a reproduction of a city seal in campaign literature or mass mailings can, if it is shown that it was used with intent to deceive the voters, violate the state Elections Code as well. (See Elections Code section 18304.)  I am not suggesting that any past reference to the logo has violated that provision Elections Code, but the candidates should be aware of that prohibition as well as they prepare and circulate campaign materials in the future.
 
For all of these reasons, the candidates should be urged not to use the City Seal or the City Logo in campaign materials.  Please feel free to forward this email to the candidates.  I hope this proves helpful.

David E. Kendig 
City Attorney, City of Tustin

So, the city’s mouthpiece David Kendig agrees with OTT in that the use of the city seal and logo is a no-no on campaign literature. He also states the city seal is now considered a logo by the city, although we are still trying to see where that was read into the current ordinance. In any case, there does not appear to be any penalty for using the seal. Kendig does point out the use of the official seal is a violation of the Elections Code (as we did) and that it is a misdemeanor. He also says that he is not saying prior usage of the seal is not necessarily a violation. Huh? Of course it is, David. Quit pandering to Allan Bernstein and his campaign manager, Jerry Amante.

It is quite unlikely the OCDA will pursue any kind of meaningful investigation. After all, this involves Republicans in Orange County and we are talking about the most corrupt district attorney in the State of California. T-wreck has never prosecuted a campaign law violation that we are aware of.

That said, the City Attorney is, by now, aware of the violations made by the Bernstein campaign. Rather than telling the city clerk to “feel free to forward” the email to candidates, as the official interpreter of law for our city, it would be appropriate for him to issue a letter of warning to Bernstein demanding he remove the photo from his Facebook page where he is actively campaigning, cease using it on campaign literature either digital or print, and refrain from using it in the future. That would send an appropriate message to all parties they should play by the rules.

6 thoughts on “The City Chimes In On Bernstein’s Campaign Law Violation

  1. It doesn’t surprise me that they won’t go after Bernstein for doing this. Al Murray did the same thing at the beginning of his campaign. Who do you think gave him access?
    I guess Jerry and his puppets figure they can get away with these violations because they have the city attorney in their back pockets – or at least Jerry’s – and they’re right.
    Please, David Kendig, prove me wrong! I won’t mind!

  2. I agree. The city needs to send the letter to Bernstein. If he gets away with this, what else would he get away with. We need forthright candidates for the office, who play by the rules and not abuse them.

  3. While we are on the subject of campaign rules, I am curious why so many know that School Board member Francine Scinto is more a full time resident of Laguna Beach, and not Tustin, and yet, she continues to keep her seat, and run as an incumbent. What is the agenda of a person who moved in 2004 to continue this sham to the students and families of TUSD and the fellow board members that cover it up? It is not hard to find the facts of where she lives. As simple google search did it for me over a year ago, and when I brought it up to the district, I was sent on my way to the relevance. Yet the rule is clear. Your domicile (where you lay your head at night) has to be the district you serve. So bizarre, this cover up.

    • I am not sure where you got your information from. You might want to google her again. Scinto lives in Santa Ana but within the boundaries of the TUSD. Do you have a beef with her actions on the Board?

      Thanks for reading and commenting.

Comments are closed.