Just one day before political underdog Roy Lee pulled off his stunning upset of incumbent Das Williams in the 2024 race for Santa Barbara County’s First District supervisor seat, he quietly accepted a $5,000 campaign contribution from the Santa Barbara Rental Property Association’s political action committee.
Earlier this year, the association sued the City of Santa Barbara over its rent-freeze ordinance.
Lee’s actions suggest he stands with rental property owners. But does he?
Take his endorsement of Santa Barbara mayoral candidate Kristen Sneddon, who, over this last year, led the City Council’s drive to a rent freeze.
Lee didn’t simply endorse Sneddon; he also cut her a $500 check.
Because the county works closely with the city, Lee didn’t need to risk alienating himself by gambling on a single mayoral hopeful.
Lee also could have chosen to endorse Eric Friedman, who had sought additional public input about the freeze, but he didn’t.
Endorsements often carry with them an agreement to reciprocate. Take former City Councilwoman Alejandra Gutierrez, who, while still serving, showed political courage by endorsing Lee against Williams, the Democratic Party darling.
When I asked Gutierrez why she took the risk, she said she believed Lee would be “different, an honest broker who was not part of the political machine” — a machine that pundits with much louder voices than mine often criticized.
Following his razor-thin victory, Gutierrez asked Lee to reciprocate that fall by endorsing her re-election against rent-control activist Wendy Santamaria.
Lee declined, claiming his “staff” advised that he not become involved in city politics.
Really? Then what was his endorsement and $500 personal contribution to Sneddon? Charity?
Gutierrez was “shocked.” Santamaria won, becoming the council’s key vote in favor of rent control.
The Sneddon endorsement wasn’t the first time Lee jumped into the political deep end when a more thoughtful strategy might have dictated otherwise.
In Carpinteria, for example, he endorsed Adriana González-Smith in her failed challenge to Councilwoman (and now-Mayor) Natalia Alarcon. The endorsement was announced before Lee even took office, in a news release dated Sept. 27, 2024.
Perhaps this endorsement was precipitated by Wade Cowper, Lee’s former campaign manager and now chief of staff.
You see, in a filing 24 days before the endorsement, Cowper is listed as González-Smith’s “assistant treasurer” and she ultimately paid his company, Hidden Gems Public Relations, more than $3,100 for print advertising.
Cowper also has a financial history with Sneddon, collecting $2,500 as a “campaign consultant” in 2017 and $1,000 for IT expenses in 2022.
Of course, if Lee was his “own man,” all the coaxing in the world, assuming it even occurred, wouldn’t matter.
Which brings us back to the original concern. Does Lee stand for anything personally? Does he have his own position on any policy whatsoever, and is he adding individual value on the Board of Supervisors?
Certainly, as it relates to rent control this matters because it will next be addressed by the county.
At a June 9 hearing, for example, more than a few people from organizations like the Washington, D.C.-based National Low Income Housing Coalition testified for countywide rent control, never mind that rent control does not — and never does — work.
Sadly, it appears that the only thing that has changed about First District politics are the names of the players.
Because at least looking from the outside in — where many of Lee’s disappointed supporters now sit — his endorsements seem neither pure nor policy driven.
Can Lee even articulate them in a manner his constituency supports? And, once this question is answered, let’s discuss the single issue he campaigned on and raised significant contributions against: Carpinteria cannabis.
Is it fixed yet? Not even remotely!
