,

Jacky Elizalde Wants District 2’s Seat. What Would She Change?

,

Updated 10/21/2026 9:55 am PST

District 2 Candidate Jacky Elizalde is campaigning on emergency response, everyday services and budget scrutiny. Her proposals deserve the same close reading as the incumbent’s record.

Jacky Elizalde has already come close to taking Victor Preciado’s seat. In November 2022, she received 1,109 votes to his 1,216. The margin was 107 votes. She returns to the District 2 contest with experience around government and a platform built around services residents use every day. [1]

Her campaign describes her as a longtime Pomona resident, mother, labor advocate and former congressional district representative. She is challenging an incumbent, but she has worked inside government herself. The April 2024 Congressional Directory lists Jacqueline Elizalde as a field representative in U.S. Representative Norma Torres’s Ontario district office. [2][8]

Her earlier work included county services. An October 2020 Campus Times profile, published during her run for Pomona mayor, reported that she worked for San Bernardino County’s Human Services Department, helping families living in poverty with housing and grants. The same profile described human trafficking as one of her campaign concerns; the issue remains part of her 2026 safety platform. [4][9]

Mt. San Antonio College independently lists Jacqueline Elizalde as a Pomona at-large representative on its Citizens’ Oversight Committee. The committee monitors the proper use of campus construction bond money and informs the public about those expenditures. Its members are appointed by the college’s trustees. [3]

Ms. Elizalde’s labor support deserves consideration beyond the addresses on campaign checks. The Census Bureau estimates for 2020–2024 show that 79.7% of Pomona residents age 25 and older do not possess a bachelor’s degree, while 26.5% lack a high school diploma or equivalent. Access to training and jobs with decent wages and benefits deserves attention in that context. Her campaign lists endorsements from the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and numerous construction unions, including plumbers, ironworkers, electricians and carpenters. A union’s office address does not establish where its members live. The city of Pomona’s proposed project labor agreement concerns wages, benefits, dispute resolution and opportunities for local workers. As for the incumbent Victor Preciado, the question is what he has done to move that proposal toward adoption. Expressing his support for a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) and delivering an enforceable agreement are different measures of his record.

Her public-safety platform gives voters a specific proposal to examine: making the reopening of Fire Station 181 a priority. She also calls for improved emergency response, neighborhood partnerships and pedestrian safety. Her published safety page does not supply a reopening cost, staffing plan or timetable. Those details would help residents judge what she could deliver. [4]

Her public-services proposals concern ordinary problems: maintained park restrooms, repaired streets, working lights and an accessible library. These commitments are easy to understand. They still require budgets, staff and decisions about which work happens first. [5]

In an Inland Valley Daily Bulletin candidate questionnaire, Elizalde grouped homelessness, housing affordability and public safety among the city’s connected problems. She supported a mix of housing options, including paths to ownership; said warehouses have a purpose but should not be overconcentrated in any community; and said local government should uphold the law while protecting residents and staying in contact with county, state and federal officials on immigration. The answers establish a direction, but not measurable targets or an implementation plan. [12]

Regarding finances, Elizalde proposes an annual, in-depth forensic review of the City’s budget. She also calls for eliminating spending that no longer serves a clear purpose and pursuing outside funding. Her fiscal platform does not identify particular cuts or explain the proposed review’s scope and cost. A promise to reduce waste becomes more useful when a candidate identifies the waste. [6]

However, her own public-service record also requires scrutiny. The City’s August staff report described three unexcused Parks and Recreation Commission absences in 2026. A July 16 motion recommending her removal failed on a 3–3 vote. Councilmember Elizabeth Ontiveros-Cole, who had appointed her, then requested council consideration. On August 3, the Council removed Elizalde in a 5–0 vote. Preciado recused himself; Mayor Tim Sandoval was absent. [7][10]

Elizalde addressed the absences in an August 26 campaign statement. She said some involved childcare responsibilities and caring for a sick child, and accused the Council of treating her differently from other commissioners. Her statement acknowledged the Council’s independent removal authority under the Charter. Those are her explanations and allegations, rather than a City finding about its motives. [11]

The attendance record and her explanation belong together. Voters can assess both while asking how she would manage the demands of a council seat. The Council’s handling of her removal does not answer that question for her.

Elizalde’s campaign offers proposals voters can question directly: how to improve emergency response, maintain public spaces and examine City spending. Winning an argument against the incumbent would only get her into the seat. Carrying out those proposals would be the job.


Editor’s note: The Pomonan invited both District 2 candidates to submit an op ed or participate in a written interview. Neither responded by the stated deadline. Their positions are drawn from public records, campaign materials and published questionnaires.

The Pomonan is an independent publication of essays, criticism, photography, and cultural commentary.

,

Victor Preciado Wants Four More Years. District 2 Has a Record to Judge

,

The incumbent, Victor Preciado is campaigning on neighborhood improvements and community work. The question is what another term would deliver.

Victor Preciado’s campaign website calls its accomplishments section “The Receipts.” After nearly eight years on the Pomona City Council, that is a reasonable place to start.

First elected in 2018, Preciado is asking District 2 to keep him in office against a familiar opponent: Jacqueline “Jacky” Elizalde. Their November 2022 race ended with 1,216 votes for Preciado and 1,109 for Elizalde. He won by 107 votes. District 2 has already demonstrated that keeping him is an argument, not a formality. [1][2]

Preciado’s political identity rests heavily on neighborhood work. ActiveSGV, which honored him in 2022, described his involvement in pandemic grocery deliveries and the monthly CommUnity Pull Up resource fairs. Its account credited volunteers and community organizations alongside the councilmember. The work extended beyond an election-season appearance. [2]

That record gives voters something concrete to assess: whether those services reached them, whether they continued and whether City Hall became easier to deal with.

His reelection campaign highlights park improvements and street repairs. Its next-term priorities include affordable housing, transportation and youth mentorship. These are familiar municipal promises. An incumbent has to explain what remains unfinished and why another four years would change it. [3]

In an Inland Valley Daily Bulletin candidate questionnaire, Preciado called affordability the top issue facing District 2. He supported increasing housing supply for renters and prospective homeowners, backed modern logistics projects that meet higher environmental standards while opposing unchecked warehouse expansion, and said City resources should not be used to assist federal immigration enforcement. The positions are clearer than the broad themes on his campaign site, although they still leave questions about the ordinances, funding and votes he would pursue. [10]

Preciado also represents Pomona on Foothill Transit’s governing board. That gives him a regional role in a service residents depend on to reach work, school and appointments. Voters can reasonably ask which service improvements he intends to pursue and how he would measure success. [4]

His campaign’s language sometimes gives him personal credit for public work. The park claim is especially broad: the site says he revitalized every park in District 2. Voters should be able to match that claim to individual parks, completed work and funding sources. A councilmember can help advance a project; staff, taxpayers, outside agencies and the rest of the council also have roles. [3]

The next term needs an explanation of its own: which repairs remain, which housing proposals he would bring forward and what residents would receive that they are not receiving now.

Community events can be useful public service. Residents also need a government that answers between events, explains its decisions and makes its spending understandable. An incumbent asking for another term should be prepared to discuss both.

His campaign donors include a company that does business with the City. As The Pomonan previously reported, Athens Services contributed $499 to Preciado’s campaign on January 30, 2026. Athens holds Pomona’s exclusive franchise for residential and commercial trash collection. The company residents pay to haul their trash also helped finance the incumbent’s reelection campaign. [5]

His record also includes votes for Flock cameras. On December 18, 2023, Preciado joined a 7–0 vote accepting an $860,000 state grant and authorizing a sole-source lease of Flock cameras and related services. On September 16, 2024, he joined a 6–0 vote authorizing another Flock camera purchase of up to $500,000; Councilmember Robert Torres was absent. Both actions were approved through the consent calendar. [6][7]

On February 23, 2026, Preciado also joined the 7–0 vote adopting Resolution No. 2026-22, placing a proposal to amend Measure Y before voters in June. That proposal became Measure Z. It sought to repeal the youth funding measure’s Charter provisions and replace them with Municipal Code provisions. His campaign emphasizes youth mentorship; his record also includes voting to put that rewrite on the ballot. [8][9]

Preciado’s case for reelection rests on work he can point to and relationships he has built. District 2’s decision is whether that record adds up to enough—and whether his next-term plans are specific enough to warrant four more years.

REFERENCES

1. Los Angeles County, November 2022 final official election results, page 85.

2. ActiveSGV, August 31, 2022 award profile. This is an award citation from an organization recognizing him, rather than an independent audit of his record.

3. Victor Preciado campaign website. Accomplishments and future priorities attributed to the campaign are campaign claims.

4. Foothill Transit governing boards.

5. The Pomonan, Who Is Funding Pomona’s District 2 Council Race?. Previously published reporting identifying the Athens contribution and franchise relationship.

6. December 18, 2023 final City Council minutes, pages 2–3 and 5–6: attendance, consent-calendar vote and Item 7, Resolution No. 2023-239.

7. September 16, 2024 final City Council minutes, pages 2 and 8: attendance and Item 5, Flock purchase authorization.

8. February 23, 2026 final City Council minutes, pages 2 and 9–10: attendance and Item 13, Resolution No. 2026-22.

9. City of Pomona, Measure Z, identifying Resolution No. 2026-22 as the measure text.

10. Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, May 5, 2026, Preciado primary-election candidate questionnaire.

Editor’s note: The Pomonan invited both District 2 candidates to submit an op ed or participate in a written interview. Neither responded by the stated deadline. Their positions are drawn from public records, campaign materials and published questionnaires.

The Pomonan is an independent publication of essays, criticism, photography, and cultural commentary.

Pomona Had Plenty of Absent Commissioners. City Hall Removed the One Running for Council

The 2026 candidate for Pomona’s District 2. Jacky Elizalde missed meetings. So did other Pomona commissioners. Their cases concluded with their commissions. Hers went upstairs,  and landed before the City Council and followed her onto the November ballot. 

Updated 10/14/2026 5:15 pm PST

Pomona has always had a way of conducting itself when times get hairy by “playing politics”. Nothing cryptic about that. In this particular case Pomona has gone full brow, full beard, or full bush whichever you prefer. The city has had commissioners who miss meetings,  it's not breaking news, because shit happens. People get sick. Their kids get sick. Work runs late. Family emergencies happen. Sometimes people simply do not show up because they’re tired of being tired. 

The City also has a process for when this happens. The rules are after three absences in a calendar year, excused or unexcused, the commission secretary puts a removal recommendation on the agenda. The commissioners hear the circumstances and decide whether to send the matter to the City Council. Three absences trigger a review. 

Ms. Elizalde missed three Parks and Recreation Commission meetings in 2025. Her commission reviewed the absences and voted 7–0 against recommending her removal.

In 2026 she missed three more: March 19, April 17 and June 17. The City classified all three as unexcused. On July 16, the commission tried again. The vote was 3–3. The motion to recommend her removal failed.

Pomona’s bylaws already said what came next. If a commission declines to recommend removal after the third absence, the matter returns after the commissioner misses another meeting. Ms. Elizalde did not miss another meeting first.

Councilmember Elizabeth Ontiveros-Cole stepped in four days later and asked staff to place Elizalde’s removal before the City Council. It is also imperative to understand Ms. Ontiveros-Cole had appointed Elizalde to the commission. 

The staff report acknowledged that the motion failed. Then it reached for Section 801(b) of the City Charter, which allows the Council to remove a commissioner by majority vote.
The report said the Council could remove Elizalde “outside of the process established by the standard by-laws.” The attendance process reached one result, so City Hall used another process to reach a different one.

Mayor Sandoval was absent. Councilmember Victor Preciado recused himself. The remaining five council members voted to remove Elizalde on  August 3. 

Pomona did not bring this kind of heat every time another commissioner hit the same or worse attendance threshold. 

Vehicle Parking District Commissioner Alejandra M. Tessier reached three absences in 2026. One involved illness. Another involved a family emergency. Her commission heard her explanation and voted 5–0 to retain her. Nobody escorted Ms Tessier before the full City Council for a second round. She remained on the commission and was still listed as a member in October.

Ethics Commissioner Bernice Stillions reached three excused and unexcused absences in 2025. The Ethics Commission voted 7–0 against recommending her removal. She was still serving in September 2026.

Planning Commissioners John Ontiveros and Edgar Rodriguez each had four absences in 2025. Not three, but four absences. 

The Planning Commission discussed their attendance and took no action. The chair said their absences had not delayed the commission’s work. Rodriguez said he had asked to attend one meeting remotely. Both men were still on the commission a year later.

According to Pomona’s Only Local Newspaper, La Nueva Voz their September 24 Issue reported Cultural Arts Commissioner Jovani Esparza was counted for having 15 documented absences since 2019, including four while he chaired the commission. It reported that the City Clerk confirmed Esparza had served as Preciado’s appointee since 2023. That total spans several years; the report did not give a year-by-year breakdown.

Their situations were not identical. Nothing in the bylaws required them to be. The commission review exists so actual human circumstances can be heard before City Hall starts canning people from an unpaid civic position.

Pomona has sent another attendance case toward removal. In February 2025, the City Council had an item recommending the removal of Parks and Recreation Commissioner Audrey Olmos-Govea after three or more absences. The item was pulled after she resigned that day.

Elizalde was not the first commissioner whose attendance became a serious issue. She was the commissioner whose removal motion failed, then got revived by the councilmember who had appointed her. She was also running for City Council against an incumbent.

Emails obtained show Ontiveros-Cole raising concerns with City staff before the commission reviewed Elizalde’s absences. On July 13, she asked Community Services Manager Mike Osoff for an update and wrote, “Where are we on this? I am very disappointed.” Two days later, she told Osoff and three other City employees that Elizalde had been “pardoned in 2025” and had failed to report later absences. She wrote that another commissioner was surprised by Elizalde’s “aloofness” and repeated his claim that Elizalde said she was “not getting paid.” The Pomonan could not independently verify that exchange. After the commission deadlocked 3–3, Ontiveros-Cole asked staff to place the matter before the City Council. The records reviewed by The Pomonan did not include the 2025 letter that Ontiveros-Cole said she had sent concerning Elizalde’s earlier absences. 

Ontiveros-Cole did not respond to our request for comments about why she revived the matter or whether Elizalde received the same treatment as other commissioners.

Councilmember Nora Garcia responded after the deadline. She said she supported “the decision and wishes of the appointing Councilmember” because commissioners serve at the Council’s discretion. She also said nothing in the bylaws prevents a councilmember from requesting an appointee’s removal at any time. That explains the power. It does not explain the double treatment.

Councilmember Lorraine Canales said she was not fully educated about what constituted removal and would investigate. No further explanation arrived before publication. The other council members contacted by The Pomonan did not respond.

The Council did not just take away the commissioner seat. On August 4, the City Clerk Karla Shipman told Elizalde she could no longer use “Parks Recreation Commissioner,” the ballot designation she had used during the primary. She no longer held the position. The City gave her until August 7 to choose another label.

Ms. Elizalde replied that City staff had not told her the removal would appear on the August 3 agenda. She said she believed the matter had ended at the commission level with the 3–3 vote.The records reviewed by The Pomonan do not establish whether the City had a separate legal duty to notify her personally beyond posting the public agenda.

The city clerk described the path City Hall used. The Parks and Recreation Commission did not recommend removal because its vote failed. Ontiveros-Cole made a separate request. The Council then used its Charter power to remove Elizalde outside the attendance procedure in the standard bylaws.

On August 7, Elizalde filed a replacement ballot designation: “Nonprofit Director/Mother.” Her alternate choices were “In-Home Caregiver/Mother” and “Oversight Member/Mother.”

A commission refused to recommend removal. A councilmember brought the same commissioner before the Council anyway. Five council members removed a candidate, and the City made her rewrite the words that would appear beside her name on the November ballot.

Missing three meetings did not automatically warrant a removal by a city council. Tessier, Stillions, Ontiveros, and Rodriguez were all able to stay. 

Maybe the officials had a cute collection of explanations for treating this case differently. However they did not provide one even when given the opportunity to. 

Ontiveros-Cole did not answer. Garcia said she followed the wishes of the appointing councilmember. Canales said she would look into it. The rest offered the familiar municipal sound of an empty room.

Pomona had its rules. The commission voted to not remove her. City Hall removed her anyway. Does Pomona follow its own rules out of conveniency to produce the results City Hall wants?

References

● Pomona City Charter, Article VIII, Section 801(b)

● Ordinance No. 4328

● Elizalde removal file 26-1585

● August 3 City Council meeting

● July 16 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting

● Tessier attendance file

● Planning Commission attendance file

● August 28, 2025 Ethics Commission minutes

● City email correspondence

● Elizalde ballot designation works

Victor Preciado Accepted Pomona’s Spending Ceiling 66 Days After the Primary. City Hall Has Not Explained What That Means

Victor Preciado Opted Into Pomona’s Spending Limit 66 Days After the Primary. City Hall Still Can’t Explain What Happened.

Updated 10/13/2026 5:17 am PST
Updated 10/08/2026 12:11 pm PST


The District 2 incumbent accepted Pomona’s $27,460 general election ceiling more than two months after the primary. City records show no tracking records, written guidance or legal analysis explaining what happened next.

October 8, 2026

Pomona’s campaign finance rules offer candidates a deal. Accept a voluntary spending ceiling and the candidate may place a statement in the voter information guide. Decline the ceiling and the statement is off the table.

District 2 Councilmember Victor Preciado first declined that deal. Then, more than two months after the June primary, he changed his mind and changed his answer.

On August 7, Preciado filed an amended Candidate Intention Statement saying he was “amending to accept the voluntary expenditure ceiling.” He checked the box stating that he accepted the ceiling for the 2026 primary and general election.

By then, the primary was over. His campaign reports showed total expenditures above the dollar amount of Pomona’s primary ceiling.

Pomona created a campaign spending rule tied to access to the voter guide. Preciado changed his filing 66 days after the primary, although the state law incorporated into Pomona’s City Charter contains a 14-day window. The City received and posted the amendment but has produced no records showing whether anyone reviewed it or determined that it was effective.

Pomona lists a voluntary expenditure ceiling of$15,680 for a City Council primary and $27,460 for a general election.

Preciado’s filing history shows two changes in position. On December 17, 2025, he filed an amendment stating that he would “no longer accept” the ceiling. Then, on August 7, 2026, he filed another amendment saying he would accept it.

The August filing came 66 days after the June 2 primary.

The amendment had a real consequence. Los Angeles County’s official candidate statement portal lists Preciado and provides access to his statement for the November 3 general election. The County describes its online candidate statement as an additional option to the printed statement in the Sample Ballot book.

Pomona’s City Charter says its voluntary expenditure ceiling is governed by California Government Code section 85400 and the sections that follow. One of those provisions, section 85401, says a candidate who declined the ceiling may accept it for a general election within 14 days after the primary, provided the candidate did not exceed the primary ceiling.

That state law is written for candidates for state office. Pomona chose to incorporate those provisions into its City Charter. How the City applies its timing and eligibility rules to City Council candidates is therefore not a minor technicality. It is the question.

Preciado’s May 21 campaign statement reported $22,918.69 in cumulative expenditures through May 16. That reported total was $7,238.69 higher than the $15,680 ceiling. Establishing whether he exceeded the ceiling requires identifying which expenses counted toward it. A later statement placed his cumulative expenditures through June 30 at $29,476.02.

Preciado was allowed to spend past the primary ceiling because he opted out. Then he opted back in. That is where things get a wee bit messy. The state rules Pomona adopted appear to allow that switch only if the candidate stayed below the primary limit.

His August form creates another question. It checked the general box accepting the ceiling, but it did not mark the separate amendment line declaring that the candidate had not exceeded the primary ceiling and was accepting the ceiling for the general election.

Maybe the City has an interpretation that makes the amendment proper. If so, it should be able to state it and identify the rule. So far, it has done neither.

What his latest filing shows

The numbers must be separated by election period. Preciado’s first general election preelection statement, filed September 24 and covering July 1 through September 19, reported:

$4,190 in monetary contributions received during the period;

$4,709.41 in payments made;

no accrued expenses or unpaid bills; and

an ending cash balance of $5,560.03.

Even if every dollar in payments reported for that period counted toward the general election ceiling, the total remained $22,750.59 below it.

The same filing lists $34,185.43 in total expenditures for the calendar year. That amount combines spending across reporting periods and cannot simply be compared with the general election ceiling. Calculating spending counted toward that ceiling requires reviewing the expenses and allocating them to the appropriate election.

The City says it keeps no tracking records

The Pomonan asked the City for the records that should settle the issue.

In response to a September 10 Public Records Act request, the City pointed to its public filing portal and municipal code. But when it came to the files that would actually blow this open, the official response was straight blunt: “No responsive documents.”

The City said it had no spreadsheet, worksheet, database entry, calculation, audit record or review notes tracking Preciado’s expenditures against the ceiling. It said it had no written policy or staff guidance explaining how compliance is monitored, which expenses count, what happens if a candidate reaches the ceiling or whether exceeding it affects a candidate statement. It also reported no internal communications, warning, determination, referral, complaint, enforcement record or legal analysis concerning whether Preciado reached or exceeded the limit. That response was marked complete on September 23.

What the response does show is that City Hall could not produce a paper trail explaining how it administers a rule that determines what voters see in their election guide.

A narrower follow up request was submitted on September 24 seeking records showing any City analysis of the August amendment, its timing and Preciado’s eligibility to accept the general election ceiling after the primary. Under the California Public Records Act, an agency generally must make a determination within 10 days or provide written notice of an extension based on unusual circumstances.

As of October 8, the City had provided no determination, no records and no extension notice in response to that request.

Preciado also did not respond to detailed questions sent by The Pomonan about the amendment, his campaign spending and the City’s administration of the ceiling.

A ceiling is not much use if nobody can explain it

The unresolved issue is whether the August amendment was timely and effective, and why City Hall has produced no records showing that anyone made that determination.

Pomona made the deal simple. Agree to the spending ceiling, get space in the voter guide. Preciado declined the ceiling for the primary, reported total expenditures above the primary ceiling’s dollar amount, then filed an amendment accepting the general election ceiling 66 days after the primary. His statement now appears on Los Angeles County’s official candidate statement portal. The City received and posted his amendment but has produced no record explaining whether the amendment was timely and effective or who reviewed it.

Pomona has no shortage of rules. Keeping track of whether City Hall actually follows them is another story. If Preciado’s amendment complied, the City should explain why. If the 14 day condition works differently for local candidates, the City should point to the rule that says so. And if nobody reviewed the amendment at all, voters deserve to know that too.

The ceiling may be voluntary. Explaining how City Hall administers it is not.

SOURCE DOCUMENTS

Julian Lucas is the founder and publisher of The Pomonan, as well as a photographer and writer. His work examines art, culture, local government, race, displacement and the social consequences of public policy. And don’t trip out and shit. He knows he needs to update his website.

Who Is Funding Pomona’s District 2 Council Race?

UPDATED
09/10/2026 12:56 pm PST
09/07/2026 7:36 pm PST

Pomona District 2 campaign funding

Reported itemized monetary and nonmonetary contributions through June 30, plus late-contribution reports through August 28, 2026.

The candidates, Jacky Elizalde and the incumbent Victor Preciado campaign filings reveal two very different fundraising operations, and one contribution that is deserving of a disclosure.

We understand that money does not cast a ballot, but its always been the storyteller within politics. In Pomona’s District 2 City Council race, incumbent Victor Preciado and challenger Jacky Elizalde are financing their campaigns through noticeably different networks of supporters.

After a review of itemized contributions reported through June 30, along with late-contribution reports filed through August 28, shows approximately $41,066 in monetary and nonmonetary contributions reported by Preciado’s committee and approximately $64,518 reported by Elizalde’s committee.

While these figures do not necessarily represent each campaign’s complete fundraising total, they provide us with a story of who is investing in each candidate. Also understand they are calculated from itemized transactions in Pomona’s campaign finance database and do not include every small, unitemized contribution, loan or independent expenditure.

Victor Preciado, Incumbent

The incumbent, Preciado, has a contributor list that is a mixture of Pomona residents, local business interests, organized labor, political and figures.

Preciado’s filings also include individuals connected to local nonprofits. Emily Dolce is the executive director of The Common Good LA. Christian Verdugo is president of the 909 Market Foundation and Holly Reynolds is an educator at Bright Prospect. Bright Prospects was founded by Mayor Tim Sandoval.

The contributions came from the individuals, not their organizations. That distinction matters because a 501(c)(3) cannot legally contribute to a political candidate, but the people operating the non-profit can. 

Several of Preciado’s individual contributors are connected to nonprofits that have received public funds through the city of Pomona. The filings show who contributed money. So what does this connection mean? 

His largest reported contributor is the Laborers Local 300 Small Contributor Committee, which gave $2,750. United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1428 contributed $2,000.

Other substantial contributors include Metro Event Center at $1,800, All Sports Hospitality LLC at $1,500, Ana Preciado at $1,500, Marisol Ramirez at $1,250 and 24 Hour Laundry Inc. at $1,250.

Several contributors gave approximately $1,000, including Miguel Sanchez, Sergio Gomez, Laura Mundy, Rick Albertini, Michael Preciado, Stein Team Realty and Thomas “Tom” Hsieh.

Another contributor we all are aware of from our previous reporting was Athens Services, which gave Preciado’s campaign $499 on January 30, 2026. Athens holds Pomona’s exclusive franchise for residential and commercial trash collection under an agreement awarded by the City Council. Of course the contribution does not establish that Preciado gave Athens favorable treatment. But when a company doing business with the City contributes to a sitting councilmember, that relationship belongs in front of voters, not hiding behind the garbage can with its wheels and ass sticking out.

Athens is not the only corporate private business appearing in Preciado’s filings. Additionally, Preciado’s cute collection of contributors include businesses and people connected to real estate, hospitality, development and other commercial interests, although much of his money also comes from individual donors and organized labor. But these contributions do not tell or prove that anyone purchased influence. But corporations do not need Pomona City Hall to rewrite the federal tax code. But what they do need is the approvals of contracts, developments, franchises, fees and policies that can affect their bottom lines.

Approximately $24,134 of Preciado’s reported itemized contributions came from contributors with Pomona addresses. Roughly $16,932 came from “out-of-town”. And to think Measure Y was given such a hard time for receiving “out-of-town” money. Hypocritical? However, that does not make every local contribution more virtuous. It is just the insular suburban mindset. “Out-of-town” money is suspicious when it fits the narrative and perfectly acceptable when it does not. Preciado’s financial base is mostly local, but it is hardly confined to Pomona.

Preciado also benefited from a whopping $2,250 independent expenditure reported by none other than the “po-po”—or “One-Time”—or “5-0”—or “the fuzz,” depending on which generation you belong to, but also known as the Pomona Police Officers Association Political Action Committee. Independent expenditures are not contributions to a candidate’s committee and are legally supposed to be made without coordinating with the campaign, but voters should still know when an outside organization spends money supporting a candidate.

Jacky Elizalde, Challenger

Elizalde has reported more itemized contribution money, but her fundraising base is much more heavily concentrated among labor organizations and contributors outside Pomona.

The largest amounts reported under her committee include $7,000 from Plumbers and Steamfitters U.A. Local Union 398, $5,900 from the Los Angeles County Firefighters Local 1014 Legislative Fund Committee and $5,900 from the UA Journeymen and Apprentices Local 250 PAC.

The IBEW PAC Educational Fund contributed a reported $4,000. Western States PAC contributed $3,000. Other substantial contributors include the Service Employees International Union Local 121RN Health Care Fund at $2,950, Superior Duct Fabrication at $2,950 and the United Firefighters of Los Angeles City Local 112 PAC at $2,500.

After June 30, Elizalde reported another $2,950 from the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles PAC, $1,000 from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 40 PAC and $1,000 from the Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers Local Union 105 Political Education Fund.

Approximately $9,021 of Elizalde’s itemized contributions reported through June 30 came from contributors with Pomona addresses. Approximately $50,547 came from contributors reporting addresses outside Pomona, although union members may live or work within the city.

Again, geography does not settle whether a contribution is good, bad or delivered by a hood pigeon. Labor organizations routinely support candidates in local elections because city governments make decisions affecting public works, development, employment and contracting. But the concentration is still relevant. Elizalde’s campaign is receiving significant financial support from organized labor beyond Pomona’s borders.

However, to be clear, union support is not something dirty. Unions are supposed to fight for workers, including at the ballot box. The point is not that Elizalde accepted union money. The point is that voters should know who is funding her campaign.

Her filings also complicate any attempt to place the candidates into tidy political boxes. Alongside union support, Elizalde received money connected to real estate and apartment interests, including Mark Warren Realty and Investments, Indian Hills Ltd., doing business as Villa Del Sol, and the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles PAC. Pomona politics, as usual, declines to organize itself into a convenient screenplay.

Among Preciado’s contributors is Stein Team Realty, which gave his campaign $500 on November 14, 2025, and another $500 on April 8, 2026, for a total of $1,000.

The company is associated with Mitchell Stein, creator of The Pomona Bulletin, a shiny, ambitious real estate pamphlet with an accompanying Facebook group created in 2023. Somewhere along the journey, that Facebook group also became an editorial board. Interestingly enough, another Facebook group called Pomona Bulletin had already existed. It was created by challenger Jacky Elizalde in 2019. In the Hip Hop world, creating a new Facebook group with the same name in 2023 is called biting, or being a biter. Translation: copycat.

Additionally, Stein’s relationship with Preciado goes beyond the $1,000 campaign contribution. Stein publicly identifies himself as a co-founder of Collective Acción, a Pomona-based 501(c)(3). A post in Stein’s Pomona Bulletin group also credited Preciado’s “shared effort to create” the nonprofit. So the person calling on Elizalde to withdraw was not simply commenting from outside the friend group. He was Preciado’s donor and had publicly credited Preciado with helping create the same nonprofit.

Furthermore, the group later published an editorial calling on Elizalde to withdraw from the District 2 race because of her attendance record on the Parks and Recreation Commission. The editorial did not disclose Stein Team Realty’s $1,000 contribution to Preciado, the candidate who would benefit from Elizalde’s withdrawal.

That contribution does not automatically invalidate the attendance criticism. Elizalde’s missed meetings remain fair grounds for scrutiny. However, she had addressed her record in an August 26 campaign statement. Elizalde said some absences involved childcare responsibilities and caring for a sick child. She also noted that the Parks and Recreation Commission deadlocked 3–3 on whether to recommend her removal before the City Council voted 5–0 to remove her. Elizalde alleged that commissioners with comparable or worse attendance records had been allowed to remain. The Pomonan has not independently verified those comparisons.

But the financial connection should have been disclosed. Readers deserved to know that a business associated with the person making the argument had contributed to the opposing candidate.

Apparently, the attendance record deserved a full editorial. The campaign contribution could not find its way into a footnote.

The filings do not prove that contributors control either candidate. A campaign donation is evidence of financial support, not evidence of a secret agreement, promised vote or political conspiracy.

What the records show is not a tidy contest between corporations and working people. Preciado’s financial consortium combines local residents, private businesses, property interests and organized labor. Elizalde’s campaign relies much more heavily on unions and other organizations outside Pomona, although apartment and real estate interests appear in her filings as well. One campaign is more locally dispersed. The other is more institutionally concentrated.

District 2 voters can decide which fundraising model concerns them more, or whether either one concerns them at all. They can ask Preciado what his contributors expect from his continued service. They can ask Elizalde how she will remain independent of the organizations investing heavily in her campaign.

They can also expect political commentators to disclose their own financial relationships before ordering a candidate to leave the race.

Campaign-finance filings rarely deliver a dramatic confession. Mostly, they deliver names, dates and dollar amounts. The interesting part begins when those details are placed beside what Pomona’s political voices choose to say—and what they quietly leave out.

Julian Lucas is a darkroom photographer, writer, and bookseller, though photography remains his primary language. He is the founder of Mirrored Society Book Shop, publisher of The Pomonan, and creator of Book-Store and Print Pomona Art Book Fair. And he will charge you $ 2.5 million for event photography.

Who Speaks for District 2?

Victor Preciado and Jacky Elizalde are campaigning to represent Pomona City Council District 2. Here is what they are emphasizing, and how residents can participate in The Pomonan’s reader poll.

Pomona voters will return to the polls on November 3 to decide who represents District 2 on the City Council.

Incumbent Victor Preciado and challenger Jacky Elizalde advanced from the June primary. Preciado received 1,154 votes, or 45.38 percent. Elizalde received 840 votes, or 33.03 percent. Samantha Zavala-Angulo finished third with 549 votes, or 21.59 percent.

Neither remaining candidate is presenting the race as a dramatic ideological break. Both are campaigning on familiar municipal concerns: public safety, housing, infrastructure, city services and opportunities for young people. The differences may be found less in the subjects they discuss than in their experience, priorities and proposed approach to governing.

Preciado is the incumbent and has served on the Pomona City Council since 2018.

His campaign points to work involving parks, neighborhood infrastructure, food distribution, small-business assistance and youth mentorship. For another term, Preciado says he wants to continue focusing on transportation and infrastructure, expand housing opportunities—including affordable and inclusionary housing—and support programs for young people.

Elizalde is challenging Preciado with a campaign centered on public safety, reliable city services and greater fiscal accountability.

Her stated priorities include addressing homelessness and human trafficking, improving housing affordability, supporting seniors and young people, encouraging economic development and expanding after-school programs. Elizalde has also emphasized transparent, measurable city spending and identifying additional revenue before considering higher taxes. Which candidate currently has the support of The Pomonan’s readers?

This is an informal, voluntary reader poll. It is not a scientific survey or an election forecast. Respondents are not independently verified as registered voters or District 2 residents, and the results should not be interpreted as representative of the District 2 electorate.


The Pomonan will continue following the candidates and the issues shaping the race before Election Day.

Vote here

The Pomonan editorial board consists of opinion journalists whose perspectives are shaped by their expertise, research, discussions, and established principles. This board operates independently from the newsroom.

Measure Z: Learn More About the Behavior of its Supporters

Pomona politics has always had an oddly territorial quality to it. After a while, you begin noticing a kind of hyper-local identity bubble surrounding parts of Pomona’s culture, where social belonging, familiarity, and longtime relationships often matter as much as the actual issues being debated.

The public reaction surrounding Measure Z has exposed that dynamic in ways that go far beyond budgeting or youth funding.

At first glance the debate appears to be about budgeting. Youth funding versus city services. Fiscal responsibility versus protected investment. But spend enough time watching the social media conversations unfold and another pattern starts emerging underneath the numbers. The debate quickly stops being about policy and starts becoming about legitimacy. Suddenly the real question becomes, who is actually allowed to speak for Pomona? 

Support Measure Y publicly and watch what happens. Where do you live? How long have you lived here? Are you a home owner, or just a renter? Who do you work for? Are you connected to outside organizations? Do you actually understand the city? Did you even read the measure correctly? Are you really a concerned resident or just somebody pushing another agenda? Residents defending youth investment increasingly find themselves having to explain their community ties, backgrounds, volunteer history, employment, and even family roots simply to participate in the conversation without suspicion.

That reaction is revealing. Because healthy civic disagreement usually focuses on the policy itself. The insular community prioritizes social belonging over outside connection.

And once a city begins treating political disagreement like possible infiltration, the conversation shifts into something much deeper than budgeting.

And the language surrounding Measure Y has repeatedly drifted into exactly that territory. Opponents regularly describe supporters as influenced by “coastal elites,” outside organizations, Northern California money, or people who supposedly do not understand the consequences of what they voted for. One of the more revealing arguments circulating publicly is the claim that the only reason Measure Y passed was because average voters “didn’t understand” the impact it would have on the city.

That is an extraordinary thing to say about your own electorate.

Because once you frame voters as uninformed, manipulated, or emotionally misled, every supporter of the measure becomes politically suspect by default. Support for youth investment no longer appears as a legitimate civic position. It becomes evidence of confusion, outside influence, or ideological capture.

At times the reaction begins resembling the same insulated political behavior visible throughout national politics, where disagreement itself becomes treated as evidence of infiltration rather than a normal part of democracy.

And that is where the conversation starts revealing deeper anxieties inside Pomona’s political ecosystem.

For decades the city has comfortably operated through overlapping relationships between nonprofits, political figures, consultants, developers, commissions, unions, business interests, and civic organizations. None of that was ever treated like some dangerous outside invasion threatening the soul of Pomona. The city absorbed years of redevelopment promises, consultant culture, politically connected projects, and uneven reinvestment without this level of existential panic.

In cities this insular, even the self-proclaimed “only” local media (LOL) eventually stop functioning like independent observers and start sounding like extensions of the same political social circles protecting each other from criticism. 

There is also something almost performative in the way fiscal responsibility suddenly enters the conversation once youth funding becomes structurally protected. Pomona residents spent years watching warehouses spread across the city, expensive revitalization promises come and go, consultant studies pile up, executive compensation rise well into the hundreds of thousands, and politically connected development culture operate with relatively little public hysteria about bankruptcy. Public salary databases already show multiple city positions with total compensation reaching deep into six figures. Yet once the discussion shifts toward guaranteed investment in young people, the language immediately becomes apocalyptic. Suddenly the city is supposedly standing at the edge of collapse. That contrast is difficult to ignore.  

But Measure Y triggered something different.

Another revealing argument repeated throughout the debate is the insistence that Pomona already has youth programs. But that response unintentionally exposes another layer of the conflict. The issue was never whether young people receive absolutely nothing. The issue was who controls the investment, how protected it remains over time, and whether funding stays dependent on the same familiar institutional networks already embedded within the city’s political culture. Symbolic support feels comfortable when it moves through existing relationships. Structural obligation feels different.

Because unlike symbolic campaign promises about helping youth “someday,” Measure Y attempted to structurally protect funding outside the normal rhythm of political discretion. And once public money becomes structurally protected, the old political comfort zone starts changing. Future councils lose flexibility. Institutional networks lose leverage. The familiar relationship between speeches, priorities, and spending begins shifting away from personality-driven politics and toward obligation.

That is why the reaction feels so emotionally charged.

The fear is not simply about numbers on a spreadsheet. The fear is about losing control over the narrative of who gets to define Pomona’s priorities moving forward.

And honestly, that is why so much of the debate has started sounding strangely territorial. The rhetoric repeatedly circles back toward authenticity, belonging, and ownership over the city itself. Who is a “real” Pomonan? Who understands the city properly? Who gets trusted automatically? Who has to prove themselves first?

What makes the reaction especially revealing is how tightly parts of Pomona’s political culture now operate through identity, loyalty, and social belonging. “One Pomona,” a phrase heavily promoted over the years as a vision of unity, increasingly begins functioning less like a civic ideal and more like a political social circle with a strangely cult-like relationship to disagreement. Once that happens, disagreement itself becomes treated as betrayal.

Once that happens, criticism no longer feels like ordinary democratic conflict. It feels personal. Outsiders become suspicious. Dissent becomes disloyalty, and the name calling begins among grown-adults. And support for structurally protected youth funding suddenly gets interpreted as an attack on the city itself rather than a policy disagreement between residents.

Those questions now appear almost as often as discussions about the actual measures.

The irony is that cities do not survive by becoming socially sealed ecosystems suspicious of every unfamiliar voice or political coalition. Cities evolve through participation, disagreement, demographic change, migration, organizing, experimentation, and new generations demanding different priorities than the ones before them. Pomona itself has always been shaped by outside forces, regional economics, state policies, transportation systems, labor migration, development interests, and cultural change. The idea that the city exists as some isolated political island untouched by outside influence has never really been true.

But insular political cultures often respond to change by tightening social boundaries instead of widening civic conversation.

And that is exactly what parts of Pomona have revealed. 

Julian Lucas is a darkroom photographer, writer, and a bookseller, though photography remains his primary language. He is the founder of Mirrored Society Book Shop, publisher of The Pomonan, and creator of Book-Store and Print Pomona Art Book Fair. And yes he will charge you 2.5 Million dollars for event photography.

The Establishment Learns to Speak Activist

Pomona survived warehouses, consultant culture, infrastructure upgrades, privatization deals, and endless promises of revitalization. But somehow protected youth funding is where the city suddenly discovered fiscal panic.

Photography Julian Lucas ©2021

For years, Pomona’s political establishment treated young people the way cities often do, as symbolism. Scholarship photos. Ribbon cuttings. Nonprofit brochures. Election season speeches about “the future.” Everyone loves talking about youth investment as long as the investment remained flexible, manageable, and safely dependent on whichever city council happened to be in power at the time. Then Measure Y passed, and suddenly the same institutional culture that comfortably survived warehouses, mis-match hodgepodge development, privatization deals, consultant culture, and selective reinvestment discovered a deep existential fear about fiscal responsibility. And all of a sudden everyone in the establishment has become an activist.

The city has begun to speak the language of “community.” The Pomona Police Association is now speaking the language of “protecting youth.” The same political culture that spent years approving truck corridors, privatization agreements, endless consultant studies, and development patterns that somehow always seemed to benefit everybody except the people already living here now appears deeply worried that Pomona may financially collapse if young people receive protected investment. Apparently the city survived everything else just fine. Warehouses, giveaways, politically connected nonprofit ecosystems, selective reinvestment, and a municipal addiction to “revitalization” projects that rarely seem to revitalize the same neighborhoods twice, all manageable. But youth funding? That is where the adults draw the line.The performance would almost be impressive if it were not so transparent.

Because Measure Z is not being sold honestly as an attempt to weaken Measure Y. Nobody is standing at the podium saying, “Actually we preferred the old arrangement where youth investment depended entirely on whichever council happened to be in office that year.” Instead residents receive the modern municipal remix. Accountability, sustainability, flexibility, protecting services, responsible implementation. The establishment did not reject the language of reform after Measure Y passed. It learned it like a Hip Hop song, repeating the words confidently long before understanding where they came from. Now everyone suddenly cares deeply about transparency.

It’s rather comical Pomona’s leadership has discovered grassroots vocabulary the same way corporations discover social justice during Pride Month. Overnight. Professionally designed. Of course condescending and full of concern.

And yes, Pomona Police Officers Association is going hard for Measure Z. Which is almost beautiful in its irony. Pomona spent years hearing that grassroots organizers were too emotional, too disruptive, too unrealistic about the city’s finances. Now suddenly the establishment is out here running full campaign mode. Signs, videos, coordinated messaging, carefully rehearsed concern about the future of the city. At this point you half expect to see PPOA members and city council allies sweating on corners waving Measure Z signs like they just discovered activism three weeks ago, buying bacon wrapped hot dogs con todo and Funions con chile from somebody’s abuelita selling on the sidewalk.

Meanwhile, the actual structural changes buried underneath the language of “responsibility” tell a much more interesting story. Public analyses comparing Measure Y and Measure Z argue that the newer measure would dramatically reduce the scale of the original Children and Youth Fund while weakening parts of the accountability framework voters originally approved. According to those analyses, Measure Z changes the funding source entirely, significantly reduces projected revenue, weakens the authority of the Accountability Board, softens participatory budgeting language, removes timelines, and shifts more control back toward traditional city administration.  

That is not a technical adjustment. That is the establishment trying to pull the steering wheel back after briefly losing control of the car.

And the funniest part is how carefully the entire thing is packaged. Nobody sounds angry. Nobody sounds defensive. Everything is delivered in the soothing language of adults trying to save the city from reckless idealism. The message is not “we oppose youth investment.” The message is “trust us to manage it properly.” Which in Pomona is particularly rich considering many of the people now warning residents about instability belong to the exact political ecosystem that helped produce the instability residents were organizing against in the first place.

That is what makes the geography of the campaign so revealing. Measure Z signs bloom comfortably through Lincoln Park Historic District, parts of Ganesha Hills, and likely sections of Phillips Ranch. Stable homeowner zones. Established civic territory. The old guard neighborhoods where “community concern” often arrives fastest once funding structures stop revolving around City Hall discretion. Political lawn signs rarely appear randomly. They map anxiety geographically.

And the anxiety here is not really about children. It is about power. Measure Y mattered because it attempted to create protected youth investment outside the city’s normal rhythm of speeches, nonprofit galas, ribbon cuttings, and selective urgency. Young people in Pomona have always photographed beautifully for campaigns. Scholarship students. Honor roll kids. Carefully curated success stories standing beside elected officials holding oversized checks. But Measure Y threatened to move youth investment from symbolic performance into structural obligation. Suddenly future councils could not simply praise young people publicly while redirecting priorities elsewhere privately. That changes relationships inside a city.

Especially a city like Pomona where institutional networks, nonprofits, political figures, commissions, consultants, and civic influence circles often overlap so tightly they begin to resemble one long continuous luncheon.

And so the response arrives wrapped in the language of moderation. Calm voices warning about fiscal collapse. Police associations presenting themselves as guardians of youth investment. Old political structures suddenly play activist grassroots organizing because the actual grassroots organizing worked once and scared the fuck out of them.

Pomona residents should pay attention to that panic.

Because institutions rarely reveal themselves more honestly than when they begin losing control of the narrative.

Julian Lucas is a darkroom photographer, writer, and a bookseller, though photography remains his primary language. He is the founder of Mirrored Society Book Shop, publisher of The Pomonan, and creator of Book-Store and Print Pomona Art Book Fair. And yes he will charge you 2.5 Million dollars for event photography.

,

The Municipal Romance of Trash, Trucks, and Campaign Cash

,

A campaign contribution from Athens Services is reopening old questions about privatization, infrastructure, political alliances, and who Pomona believes City Hall ultimately serves.

Editorial illustration by The Pomonan

There are only a few things less glamorous than garbage. It sits outside quietly in black and blue containers, rolled toward the curb once a week with the expectation that it disappears before the next morning. Most residents do not think about sanitation contracts, transfer stations, hauling agreements, or municipal privatization until something changes. But when the bill jumps. A service changes. A truck appears more often than it used to. Then suddenly, garbage becomes political.

And of course, in Pomona, where politics increasingly feels trendier than the restaurants, galleries, and art itself, trash had already become a political issue long before campaign season arrived. 

For years, residents, business owners, and city observers have argued over the city’s relationship with Athens Services, the private company tied to Pomona’s controversial waste collection transition. Some defended the move as modernization. Others viewed it as another example of a city steadily outsourcing pieces of itself while residents were left absorbing the consequences in real time.

Now there's an issue that has entered the campaign season directly. Public campaign finance filings for Victor Preciado’s 2026 reelection campaign show a $499 contribution from Athens Services dated January 30, 2026. Preciado is not a neutral observer in Pomona’s trash debate. As an incumbent councilmember, he sits inside the same governing structure that defended and normalized the city’s relationship with Athens while residents and businesses continued raising concerns about cost, accountability, and transparency. 

The amount itself is not a 5 million dollar lottery ticket. In California politics, $499 barely qualifies as eyebrow raising. But local politics operates differently than Sacramento or Washington. In municipal elections, symbolism often matters more than scale. Residents do not experience city government through million dollar lobbying campaigns. They experience it through potholes, homicides (unless the cops are not reporting) warehouse fires, zoning decisions, abandoned buildings, police response times, parks, and trash bills. That is why the contribution matters.

Not because it proves corruption. It doesn’t. Campaign donations are legal and happen all the time. But when a company tied to one of the city’s most controversial contracts starts donating to elected officials during election season, people are naturally going to question how close City Hall has become with the same companies doing business with the city. 

The Athens debate never really ended in Pomona because it was never just about trash pickup. It has always been about control.

Residents watched the city transition away from a municipal service structure toward privatization while being told efficiency and improvement would follow. Instead, many businesses complained about increased costs. Residents questioned accountability. Illegal dumping remained visible in  parts of the city. And politically, the issue lingered in the background like the smell residents insist they notice even when officials pretend not to.

Meanwhile, parts of Pomona continue carrying the physical burden of the region’s infrastructure economy. District 3 remains surrounded by warehouses, truck routes, industrial land use, and the waste transfer station itself, where the movement of garbage becomes part of the neighborhood landscape rather than an invisible municipal function hidden safely elsewhere.

This is where Pomona’s politics become revealing. 

The city often speaks about growth abstractly, but growth always lands somewhere physically. Warehouses land somewhere. Heavy truck traffic lands somewhere. Waste infrastructure lands somewhere. Rarely are those burdens distributed evenly across the map. Some neighborhoods become corridors. Others become destinations.

And once residents begin seeing those patterns, every campaign contribution starts carrying a little more meaning than it otherwise might.

The current election cycle is already exposing tensions inside Pomona’s political culture. Challengers are openly discussing council voting blocs, predictable alliances, and decisions that residents increasingly believe are settled before meetings even begin. Questions about transparency, consent agendas, and political alignment are surfacing more publicly than they have in years.

The Athens contribution enters that atmosphere at precisely the wrong time for incumbents hoping the trash debate had faded quietly into administrative history. Because residents remember.

They remember the transition. They remember the arguments. They remember who defended the contract and who questioned it. More importantly, they remember that one of the most basic services in city life became a symbol for something larger. The feeling that decisions affecting everyday people are often negotiated far above them, then delivered back down as inevitabilities.

The problem for incumbents like Victor Preciado is not simply that residents noticed the contribution. It is that many residents already believe City Hall has grown too comfortable operating within a small political orbit where contractors, council alliances, and major city decisions increasingly overlap.

And that is the danger for Pomona’s political establishment heading into 2026. Not the contribution itself. The timing.

Because once infrastructure, campaign finance, district frustration, and public distrust begin entering the same conversation, local politics stops feeling procedural. It starts feeling personal.

Garbage has a way of doing that.

District 2 Isn’t Just a Voting Bloc

Why Pomona’s political imagination may be smaller than the community it claims to represent.

Julian Lucas ©2021

District 2 is often talked about during election season as if the demographic is treated as a simple category: “the immigrant district” or “the working-class district.” Labels make politics easier. Pomona politicians flatten the people who live in this district into statistics.

But if you actually walk the streets of District 2, you quickly realize it’s something else entirely, a dense web of families, languages, small businesses, and households that hold stories stretching far wider than Pomona.

Pomona itself reflects this complexity. Roughly 72 percent of the city identifies as Hispanic or Latino (I’ve never been fond of the term Hispanic), and about one-third of residents were born outside the United States.

District 2 sits squarely inside that reality.

Many residents here are first-generation Americans. Many are immigrants. Some households include parents who have lived in the United States for decades and children who were born here. Others are newer arrivals still navigating paperwork, language barriers, and the daily uncertainties that come with starting over in a new country.

That makes District 2 different from the way it’s often portrayed in political conversations. It isn’t simply a “community of voters.” District 2 is a community of families who live with a particular kind of vulnerability.

And recently, that vulnerability became visible again.

District 2 is not unique in this regard, but in recent months residents reported ICE activity in the neighborhood, the kind of presence that sends a quiet ripple through a community. Doors close earlier. Comadres, compadres, primos, primas, tias, tios, and vecinos text each other warnings. Kids hear conversations they’re not supposed to hear yet and school absences increase.

Whether someone supports immigration enforcement or not, the emotional effect in immigrant neighborhoods is unmistakable. People feel monitored. People feel exposed.

Many people in District 2 know this feeling well.

It’s also a district where many people work jobs that rarely show up in political conversations: warehouse jobs, retail work, service work, construction, caregiving. The kinds of jobs that keep the region functioning but rarely translate into political influence.

Which raises a simple question during an election year. What does representation actually look like for a district like this?

Not representation as a campaign catchphrase, but representation as something lived day to day. Someone who understands why ICE enforcement agents are parked on a corner can change the mood of entire neighborhoods. Someone who understands that for many families here, politics isn’t an abstract debate. It’s something that touches housing, safety, schools, food insecurities, and the basic feeling of belonging.

But there’s another dynamic that often surfaces during election seasons in Pomona.

A familiar line appears in speeches at commission, committee, and council meetings, delivered with the seriousness of a credential.

“I’m from Pomona.”

The Chest-Thumping Politics of Being “From Pomona”

In Pomona politics there is a credential that gets repeated with the seriousness of a law degree.

Sometimes the curriculum vitaé gets expanded.

“I’m from Pomona.” Or “I’m a lifelong resident of Pomona.”

“I’m a homeowner.”

You’ll hear it at council meetings, campaign announcements, and the occasional moment when a politician decides to pound their chest like a hometown King Kong guarding the city limits while planting trees.

From Pomona. Not studied elsewhere. Not exposed to different ways cities function. Not particularly curious about how other communities solve problems.

Just… from Pomona.

Now don’t get me wrong. Loving the place you grew up is admirable. Loyalty to a city is a good thing. I can even say Pomona could be a gem. But it has been just that for the last couple of decades.

Being from Pomona is not the issue. Some of the most thoughtful, caring, and understanding people in this city grew up here. Others arrived later and built lives here just the same. Cities are shaped by both. The problem begins when birthplace itself becomes a substitute for ideas.

However, in Pomona politics the phrase sometimes works less like biography and more like gatekeeping.

Because once someone declares themselves the authentic voice of Pomona, something subtle happens next: everyone else starts getting sorted into categories.

You’re either a “real Pomonan” or you’re not. Then comes the classist logic: homeowner or tenant. In many political spaces, tenants are treated as if they couldn’t possibly have a voice.

Question something? You must not understand Pomona politics.

Offer a different idea?

That won’t work, you must not be from Pomona. The idea will quietly reappear later with someone else’s name on it. And whatever they produce will come with their own Pomona-ass spin on it. It’s as if the Pomonans who end up claiming the ideas live behind an imaginary wall, with little lived experience beyond the city limits. That kind of insularity is never sustainable.

Or those not from Pomona but have money to invest will build something that isn’t aligned with the present culture, opening businesses as if the city were still living in the 1990s. It doesn’t last. It closes, reopens under another name, and the cycle repeats.

Suggest the city could learn something from somewhere else?

Then you become suspicious and they’ll think you’re running for office.

It’s a clever rhetorical trick. Declare yourself the hometown authority and suddenly disagreement becomes disloyalty.

But here’s the irony.

Pomona itself is one of the most globally shaped cities in Southern California. Immigrant families, first generation Americans, people whose lives stretch across multiple cultures and countries.

Many residents here carry more international experience in their family histories than the politicians lecturing them about what “real Pomona” is supposed to look like.

So when leaders beat their chest about being “from Pomona,” the question worth asking isn’t where they were born.

The real question is how much of the world they’ve allowed into their thinking since then.

Because cities don’t grow through insularity.

They grow through exposure, curiosity, and the willingness to imagine something bigger than the street you grew up on. Key word curiosity.

Otherwise politics becomes strangely performative. Leaders loudly celebrate their hometown while quietly shrinking the possibilities of what that hometown could become.

And that’s really not civic pride. It’s just a very small box with Pomona written on the outside.

District 2 doesn’t live inside that small box. The district is shaped by families whose lives stretch across borders, languages, and cultures. In many ways, the people politicians claim to represent already understand the world in ways far larger than the narrow version of Pomona politics sometimes presented at City Hall.

Which makes the real question for voters this year a simple one. Who actually understands the district as it exists today, not as the city imagined it thirty years ago?

From what I see, the council is mostly Latino, including the mayor, and the commissions include a mix of Latinos and whites. Yet there seems to be an assumption that because many residents are working-class, they only want certain kinds of businesses. When Burlington arrives and it’s framed as a big win, it suggests leaders believe this is what the working class wants. That kind of thinking can slip into stereotyping the very community they claim to represent.

At some point the question becomes whether this is really what the working class wants, or simply the limit of what local leadership imagines the city can be.

Julian Lucas is a darkroom photographer, writer, and a bookseller, though photography remains his primary language. He is the founder of Mirrored Society Book Shop, publisher of The Pomonan, and creator of Book-Store and Print Pomona Art Book Fair. And yes he will charge you 2.5 Million for event photography.

,

Letter of Complaint Filed Against City of Pomona Ethics Commissioner for Violation of Political Campaign Laws

,

Updated 8/15/2024 | 9:12 am PT
Updated 9/12/2024 | 3:05 pm PT

On August 8, 2024, the law office of Rutan & Tucker, LLP, submitted a letter of complaint claiming that City of Pomona official Ethics Commissioner John Clifford illegally participated in a City of Pomona ballot measure campaign. They directed the letter to the City of Pomona Attorney Sonia Carvahlo; the California State Attorney General Rob Bonta; and Los Angeles’ District Attorney George Gascon.

The law offices of Rutan & Tucker are representing Pomona Kids First, the political committee that supports the ballot measure, Pomona Fund for Children and Youth Act which will be on the November 2024 ballot. They claim that Ethics Commissioner John Clifford “blatantly” violated the law prohibiting government officials from using public resources for political campaigns and submitted copies of his emails that show that the Commissioner used his government email address to campaign for a “no vote” on the initiative, directing his emails to both private individuals and media outlets -including the LA Times - during city business hours.  

First email sent by Ethics Commissioner John Clifford the public, including various news outlets.

Final email sent by Ethics Commissioner John Clifford.

According to the Pomona Kids First Initiative website, “If approved by voters, the fund will be used for programs and services that promote health and well-being” for the children who reside in the city. If passed, there will be “an allocation of an initial 2% from the city annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues that will be transferred into the Children and Youth Fund established by this initiative. Following the initial year of the implementation of this initiative, 5% of the city’s annual actual unrestricted general purpose revenues will be allocated towards this fund with an increase of 1% in the years proceeding until 10% is set aside for this fund. Along with establishing this fund, the initiative will establish the Department of Children and Youth whose primary function will be to oversee the implementation of the Children and Youth Fund and ensure that the Children and Youth Fund meets the goals and requirements outlined in the initiative.”


As stated in his email, Ethics Commissioner Clifford has depicted the initiative as a “money grab,” which appears Clifford wants to preserve the status quo. 

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

Julian is also the owner and founder of Mirrored Society Book Shop, publisher of The Pomonan.

Miranda Sheffield Candidate for Pomona District 6 Receives the LA County Democratic Party's endorsement

Photo Courtesy of Los Angeles Democratic Club ©2024

Pomona, California. — Miranda Sheffield has received the LA County Democratic Party's much-coveted endorsement. Her list of supporters, which already includes the California Faculty Association, Black Young Democrats, and Teamsters Local 1932, is significant. These latest endorsements only add to it.

Sheffield has made tremendous progress in her bid for the 6th district Council seat in Pomona since her impressive performance in the March 2024 primary election. After her stunning victory over the local political establishment's chosen candidates, Miranda is poised to become District 6's first African American councilwoman.

Vice Chair of the LA County Democratic Party Patt Sanders stated, “Miranda's passion and commitment to helping others will bring new ideas and energy to compassionately solve our homeless crisis, reduce the cost of living, and expand year-round programs and activities for youth in Pomona.”

“Miranda's passion and commitment to helping others will bring new ideas and energy to compassionately solve our homeless crisis, reduce the cost of living, and expand year-round programs and activities for youth in Pomona.”

LA County Democratic Party Vice-Chair, Patt Sanders

Miranda spent the most of her childhood in the foster care system. Pomona is where she found her stability with her second mom. Miranda is a graduate of Cal State LA and Pomona High School. Miranda returned to Pomona to raise her daughter after earning her master's degree in Human Rights Law from SOAS University of London. There, she developed into a proponent of sensible public safety reform and affordable housing.

Miranda is a member of the California Faculty Association, a college professor at Cal State LA, and has served on Pomona's Cultural Arts Commission and Police Oversight Commission.

District 6 in Pomona is a diverse working-class community with historic White and African American communities, and emerging Latino neighborhoods. Pomona is the 7th most populace City in LA County with 150,000 residents.

The Pomonan is the cultural structure, empowering visionaries to propel the global society to the future.

Pomona City Council Candidate Receives Contribution from a Tax Exempt Business

As we are all preparing for either new leadership and or continuing to keep the current. Issues are ramping up both federally and on the local level. 

The Pomonan recently accessed the campaign filings for District 6 City Council candidate Lorraine Canales and discovered what looks like a campaign finance violation.

On page 17, Canales discloses a $100 campaign contribution received on 6/23/2024 from PCS Family Services, Inc., a tax-exempt  501(c)(3) business (recognized as such in 2018), which Propublica reports generated $938,000 in revenue.

According to the IRS, (Internal Revenue Service) Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.  Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. 

We reached out to both candidate Lorraine Canales and PCS Family Services Inc. To date, neither has responded to our request for comment. 


It all raises the issue that there needs to be more public awareness about campaign finance laws.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of events because he will charge you a lot of money. Julian is also the owner and founder of Mirrored Society Book Shop, publisher of The Pomonan, and founder of Book-Store.

, ,

Investigative Report: Did Current City Council Members Victor Preciado and Steve Lustro Properly Disclose the Campaign Contributions they received from Pomona Police Officers' Association in 2018?

, ,

During the 2018 election cycle, the Pomona Police Officers Association PAC (PPOA) made campaign contributions to three Pomona City Council candidates for around $9,000 each - Victor Preciado, Steve Lustro, Christina Carrizosa. Preciado and Lustro won their election that year and are currently sitting members of Pomona’s City Council today.

In recent days, it has come to the attention of the Pomonan editorial Board that these campaign contributions were not properly reported.

In the fall of 2018, the PPOA paid more than $41 thousand to the Freedman Public Affairs for mailers to support the campaign of Victor Preciado, Steve Lustro, who won their election, and Christina Carrizosa, who lost hers.

According to CalAccess, District 2 council member Victor Preciado received a total of $9,689.12, and District 5 council member Steve Lustro received $9.396.56 from the PPOA through contributions and late independent expenditures.

Before assuming office on Dec. 3, 2018, both officials filed a California Form 700, also known as Statement of Economic Interests form, but neither reported the amount received from the PPOA. The form is meant to prevent decisions made by public officials from being influenced by their personal financial interests.

Pomona Ordinance No. 4298 states any person holding a position in Government Code Section 87200 needs to file any required Statement of Economic Interests report online or electronically with the City Clerk.

The PPOA made 83 donations to Preciado’s campaign and 72 donations to Lustro’s campaign of different totals ranging from $72.54, $27.67, $26.86, $1,436.07 and $678.59 from Sept. 2018 through Nov. 2018.

On his 700 form, Preciado reported his salary working with the Kellogg Company and from the San Gabriel Valley Conservation Corps as in the range from $1,001 to $10,000, but did not report the amount donated to his campaign by the PPOA.

Lustro did not report any of the donations from the PPOA or any other salary that might influence his decision making. See both Form-700

Under the Pomona City Code, Article II, Sec. 10-34, it stated that a candidate shall not solicit or accept any contribution which will cause the total amount contributed by such person with respect to a single election in support of or opposition to a candidate that exceeds $500.00.

However, Section 10-36 of the same code states that all contributions, including campaign contributions, exceeding $25 needs to be reported.

During the same election, the PPOA also made 72 donations that equated to $9,449.49 to the campaign of Council member Christina Carrizosa of District. Carrizosa was currently on the Council at the time, but lost her position to current Pomona City Council member, Nora Garcia.

The Police Oversight Starts Today (POST), a coalition of Pomona and area residents, filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission in Aug. 2021 claiming the PPOA caused a conflict of interest when it donated sums of money to certain council members and not equally to every potential candidate.

Council member Preciado, recently contacted, said he wasn’t aware of the money. He also stated that, the form does not need to have that kind of payment on it: 

“While [the PPOA] have to state who they are using it for, they actually can’t legally coordinate or talk to the candidate about it. In this example I wasn’t aware of this expenditure or what they used it for.”

To date, Pomona city council member Lustro has not responded to this reporter’s request for comment.

Pomona: Primary Election Results

Published 3/11/2024 | 8:10 am PST

Though ballots are still being counted, and the votes for the 2024 primary election won’t be officially certified until April 12, 2024, it looks like there will be run-offs in November between the following local candidates:

POMONA CITY PRIMARY NOMINATING ELECTION Member of the City Council, 1st District candidates Debra Martin (40%) and the incumbent John Nolte (36%).

POMONA CITY PRIMARY NOMINATING ELECTION Member of the City Council, 4th District candidates Guillermo Gonzalez (36%) and the incumbent Elizabeth Ontiveros-Cole (35%).

POMONA CITY PRIMARY NOMINATING ELECTION Member of the City Council, 6th District candidates Lorraine Canales (38%) and Miranda Sheffield (34%).

The Pomonan endorses Miranda Sheffield for the Council, 6th District. With a Master’s in Public Policy, she has served on various Commissions and is a constant contributor at Pomona’s City Council meetings.

The citizens of Pomona once again re-elected incumbent Tim Sandoval (53%) for Mayor.

The citizens passed both Measure P and Measure X, sales tax measures that, according to estimates, will bring $16.8 million and $5.8 million annually to the City, respectively.

Gil Cisneros, a former congressman and Democrat, (23%) will face off against Daniel José Bocic Martínez, a Republican (20%) for the 31st Congressional District seat in November.

For State Assembly, Republican Nick Wilson (32%) will be in the run-offs against the former Assemblyman Freddie Rodriguez’ wife, Michelle Rodriguez (23%). Freddie Rodriguez termed out of his office and ran this round for Pomona Mayor against Tim Sandoval, but came up short. In the Assembly race, Wilson and Rodriguez nosed out Pomona Council Member Robert S. Torres (20%), son of newly re-elected Congresswoman Norma Torres (54%).

Incumbent District Attorney Democrat George Gascón faced considerable opposition in this primary. At only 24% of the vote, he will be in the run-offs against Republican Nathan Hochman(17%). 

This primary election was, again, marked by low voter turnout across the county, but certainly in Pomona. Nearby Pasadena, with about 12,000 fewer residents than Pomona, had more than double the voter turnout.

The Pomonan is the cultural structure, empowering visionaries to propel the global society to the future.

Breaking: District 4 Candidate Guillermo Gonzalez Declares other Candidates have Violated Campaign Finance Laws

Published February 26, 2024 | 8:15am PST

Pomona, CA – The campaign committee of Guillermo Gonzalez for Pomona City Council 2024 has learned that both campaigns for Elizabeth Cole and Chara Swodeck are in current violation of Pomona’s campaign expenditure limits. Both candidate’s campaigns agreed to expenditure limits in return for printing a candidate statement. This rule was adopted by the voters in 2022 as part of the charter amendment updates. The city has thus far refused to enforce these expenditure limits, penalize the campaigns of the candidates, or take any meaningful action despite these apparent violations.

We will continue to monitor the situation, but this type of corruption is unacceptable, is contrary to the laws adopted by the city and state and should immediately disqualify these candidates for any position due to their actions. This campaign has reached out to the city and is seeking an immediate remedy. In the interim, the campaign seeks a statement from those organizations and elected officials who have endorsed these candidates to see if they condone such actions and if they will continue to support candidates who have demonstrated a complete lack of integrity and have seemingly violated the city’s campaign expenditure limits. The campaign has also forwarded complaints regarding both campaigns to the FPPC to seek an investigation and immediate remedy.


Organizations or elected officials who have endorsed Chara Swodeck:

Teamsters 1932
Mayor Tim Sandoval
Councilmember John Nolte
Councilmember Victor Preciado
Councilmember Nora Garcia


Organizations or elected officials who have endorsed Elizabeth Cole:

Pomona Police Officers Association
Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 398
Rep. Norma Torres
Councilmember and Assembly Candidate Robert Torres
BizFed PAC

Guillermo4Pomona@gmail.com

Guillermo Gonzalez has a Master of Science in Public Administration from California State University – Los Angeles where he graduated with honors. He has been a resident of Pomona since 2011 and is currently a candidate for Pomona City Council.

Op-ed: Water is Life

Published 02/22/2024 7:53am PST

As a lifelong, vested resident of this community–a proud husband, father, and grandfather who has raised his family here in Pomona, my dedication in protecting our water quality is not just a job to me, it’s personal.

Water is Life and must be safeguarded. It is our job at the water district to continue to provide our retail customers with a reliable source of water, and we pride ourselves in making sure of that, by working closely with the Water Resources Department in Pomona, our tap water is potable and safe for all your daily needs at home. In fact, to this day, I still drink our water from the tap.

Keeping Pomona’s water clean and affordable is no easy feat. One of the most significant fights in doing so was against the Cadiz Corporation plan to extract large quantities of groundwater from under dry lake beds in the Mojave desert from the Bonanza Springs. They are water speculators whose bizarre scheme was to drill for water under California's deserts and sell it to your area, which threatens springs that desert life depends on. This was not the solution to our water management and sustainability issues because Orange County would have had priority access to this water, and this water resource would have been depleted in a heartbeat. That is why I voted against it, even if I was a lone wolf in this decision. Ultimately, with the help of the Sierra Club, Native American tribes of the Mojave desert, community stakeholders and other water district colleagues who supported me in putting the project to rest.

Over the past 12 years of my tenure, the water district also strengthened partnerships with our local retail agencies like Pomona, Walnut Valley, and Rowland Water Districts in joint projects throughout our service area, to educate our community about water conservancy. This entailed how one exactly can become a wise water-conscious consumer through establishing drought tolerant landscaping, using water-efficient shower heads, toilets, and sprinklers in your homes and businesses.

Establishing career pathways, in partnership with other agencies and organizations in the water industry, for our students here in our community led to the initiation of the youth Junior Water Protectors Pilot Program. The goal of this program was to acclimate participants to the importance of water in their everyday life. This is something I will continue to advocate for to give students in communities of color exposure and access to careers that actually pay a livable working wage while tackling the drought issue. Many have joined our apprenticeship program and have gone on to obtain employment at various water districts.

Looking forward, it is imperative for us here at home to shore up our water supplies through stormwater capture and recharge of our basins and aquifers. Water reuse and recycling must also continue to be a priority. As we continue to deal with climate change and its effects on our weather, we must look at all options, including new technologies in desalination. By doing this we will lessen our dependence on imported water and ensure our water sustainability here athome for our community. If elected to the California State Assembly, one of my goals will be to continue this work for a better and safer future for all.

Carlos Goytia, an elected Three Valleys Municipal Water Board Trustee, is currently running for Assembly Member of Assembly District 52.