Within the last several days there has been substantial commotion in Ontario over what many in the community perceive as Councilman Alan Wapner’s effort to infest a council hopeful and her campaign with the pay-to-play ethos that has typified much of Wapner’s approach to politics in the nearly three decades he has been in office.
This year, after 133 years in which its city council members were elected in an at-large process, Ontario is transitioning to district elections. While the city’s mayor will still be selected by voters throughout the city, going forward from this year, the city’s four council members will represent a single district in the city in which each resides and be chosen by voters who live exclusively within his or her district. The city’s four districts include the most densely populated District 1, the smallest district geographically, positioned in the northwestern corner of the city; the slightly less densely populated District 2, which is the second-smallest district geographically, located in middle west side of the city; District 3, which is comprised by the city’s most recently annexed property in the former Chino Agricultural Preserve at the south end of the city referred to as Ontario Ranch; and District 4, the least dense portion of the city population-wise, involving all of the northeast portion of the city and the land at its southern and western peripheries, much of which is industrial or commercial in nature and including Ontario International Airport.
This year, races are to be held in districts 1 and 4. Incumbent council members Jim Bowman and Debra Dorst-Porada are residents of District 1. Bowman, who was most recently elected at-large in 2022 and has another two years on that term before he must leave the council, has opted not to run. Dorst-Porada, who was elected at large in 2020 and whose current term will expire in December, is seeking election in the District 1 race. She is being opposed by Luis Suarez, Joseph Angel Sandoval and Raquel Morgan Valencia, the daughter of current City Councilman Ruben Valencia, who is being maneuvered out of office later this year because he was most recently reelected at-large in 2020 and the district in which he resides, District 2, will not hold its first election until 2026.
In recent years, despite a rivalry that once existed roughly a decade and more in the past between Mayor Paul Leon and Wapner, an alliance has formed on the council that includes Wapner, Bowman, Dorst-Porada and Leon in which the four have formed a ruling coalition whereby they vote in lockstep on virtually all issues of substance and are in statistical consonance on well beyond 97 percent of all votes. At the same time, Valencia, whose votes are indistinguishable from those of Wapner, Bowman, Dorst-Porada and Leon on more than 90 percent of the items that come before the council, has had and continues to have policy differences with the four on some issues of substance. In 2022, Valencia unsuccessfully vied against Leon in the mayor’s race.
There are no council incumbents living in District 4. This year, several also-rans in past at-large elections for the city council have emerged as would-be council members representing District 4. Of those, Norberto Corona and Celina Lopez sought a council seat in the 2022 and 2020 elections, while Corona and Jose Nikyar ran in 2018. Corona, Lopez and Nikyar have thrown their hats into the District 4 ring this year, as have two others, Andrea Galván and Daisy Macias.
Macias has a connection to the current political establishment in Ontario. She formerly worked for Leon at Hope Chapel, the church not too distant from Macias’s home where Leon is the pastor. She later went to work for Leon at the City of Ontario, before moving onto an even better paying position as the community relations manager with National Community Renaissance and the Hope For Housing Foundation, two entities associated with developer Jeff Burum which are involved in the construction of affordable housing. In the time since, Macias has wangled an appointment as a member of the Ontario Park and Recreation Commission. In Ontario, as virtually everywhere else, appointments to city commissions are not handed out to those who are at odds with the elected leadership or, at least, a majority of the elected leadership.
On August 20, shortly after the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters gave indication that it had verified all aspects of Macias’s nomination as a candidate for the council representing Ontario’s District 4 and would be on the November 5 ballot, Councilman Alan Wapner transferred $40,000 out of his campaign war chest to the Macias for Council District 3 2024 campaign fund in the form of a political contribution.
Of note is that in reporting the transfer, Wapner’s campaign treasurer, his wife Judith Wapner, identified Macias as vying not in District 4 but in District 3.
Word spread like wildfire through Ontario that Wapner was militating to influence the outcome of the election, specifically to ensure Macias’s victory. Through his assistance to Macias, Wapner was, many said, seeking to purchase her votes and inveigle her into the pay-for-play ethos that has pervaded the Ontario City Council, virtually throughout Wapner’s nearly 30-year-long tenure on that panel.
During that time, Wapner has proven the most prolific fundraiser among municipal officeholders in San Bernardino County, having collected more than $3.3 million for his campaign war chest. In amassing that amount of money, Wapner has obliterated ethical constraints and gone right up to the legal line, aggressively approaching donors, generally those who have business before the City of Ontario or the Ontario International Airport Authority, the board for which he is the president. Without explicitly saying so, Wapner strives to give those he is soliciting money from the impression that if they are forthcoming with contributions to his electioneering fund, their projects pending before the Ontario Planning Commission or Ontario City Council will be given approval or the contracts to provide goods or services to the city they have bid upon will be awarded to them or the franchise they are seeking will be granted. While quid pro quos are implied in these circumstances, no direct statements, at least publicly, are made to articulate that the votes of the city council favorable to the donor are conditional upon the donations being made. Still, virtually all of Wapner’s relationships with members of the public and the business community are transactional. Though there are business entities which, and individuals who, have obtained project approval or contracts or franchises with the City of Ontario over the last two decades without making substantial political donations to Wapner, they are very rare. It is virtually universally understood that if you are going to do business with the City of Ontario, providing a donation to Wapner’s campaign fund is de rigueur. It is commonly accepted, as well, that by donating to Wapner, one is purchasing not just his vote of support but that of three other members of the council with whom he over the last decade or more has been aligned, those being Bowman, Dorst-Porada and Leon.
Wapner’s pass-through of money provided to him by his donors to Macias is meant as a signal to them and a tacit commitment from her that those who have opened their checkbooks to Wapner can now count upon Macias’s support if and when she takes her place on the council dais.
In a telephonic exchange late today with the Sentinel relating to Wapner’s $40,000 transfer of funds from his political war chest to her electioneering account and her past professional relationship with Mayor Leon through his church and at City Hall, Macias acknowledged that both might have an impact on her independence but that they would not be absolute or final factors in her decision-making process if she is elected to the council. She said her loyalty, in the main, would be to the residents of District 4 and the city as a whole.
Macias evinced an awareness of the voting block on the council consisting of Leon, Wapner, Bowman and Porada, which she characterized as being led by Leon. She said those who wanted to know whether the support she is receiving from three of those four would influence her and compromise her independence “is a good question. I believe we should not just vote one way or that I should vote for something because the mayor needs me on his side. I would vote as the voice of the city and the people to help them [i.e., the mayor and the rest of the city council] hear the community. If we are not caring about the comments of the individuals in the city or the comments of the community we are not doing our job right or correctly.”
She said her willingness to accept the money offered by Wapner was an outgrowth of practical political reality which necessitates that candidates gain the attention of voters and make them aware of what they have to offer and the positions they are taking with regard to the matters most important to the community.
“I previously ran for the school board,” she said. “This is my second run for office. When you run for office you get an understanding of how to run and connect with the voters and get your message out.”
Macias, who ran for the Area 5 position on the Ontario-Montclair School District Board of Trustees in 2018, finished second in that three-way contest and did not repeat the effort in 2022. She said the decision to run this time for city council was influenced by her enthusiasm for community involvement and the encouragement and support given her by those who are already in office.
“Alan [Wapner], the mayor [Leon] and Debbie [Porada] wanted someone who will do the right thing for the community,” she said. “I want to continue the good work that is already being done in the community.”
When confronted about the enormity of the investment that Wapner was making in her political career and how it appeared that he was seeking to not just purchase the council seat for her but to buy her support for him and his political sponsors, Macias said inquiries into whether this constituted influence peddling was a “fair question.” She said that the circumstance lends itself to what might prove to be an inaccurate interpretation, insofar that appearances could be deceiving. She said the situation was nuanced, and that the provision of such a large sum of money to a nascent politician, when augmented with an explanation of the motives behind it could be shone to be benign rather than sinister.
“I compare the difference to that between a text message and a phone call,” she said. “It may look on paper that he is giving me hush money or because ‘she’s my girl,’ but I truly believe he donated to my campaign because he believes in me. I’m not here to pick and choose. It is to do the right thing.”
She said she has gained the trust of Wapner, a former police officer, as well as of Leon and Porada because of her past civic activism. She spoke of “struggles while living in a very poor neighborhood. I grew up in Ontario, living near De Anza Park. It was a horrible place with all kinds of crime. I have seen the change. I now feel free to walk around in my neighborhood. I have been involved in the public safety programs in my neighborhood, letting people know that if they see a crime occurring or drug dealing, that it is alright to call the cops. If we remain silent, how can we expect our neighborhoods to improve or the police to help us?”
Macias said it was her past willingness to get involved in working toward improving the city that made an impression on Wapner, which led to his seeking to propel her into office. She said, “Alan giving me $40,000 may look improper and like I’m being bought, but that money is something he is providing to someone who is doing her best for her community and who will fight for the residents.”
Deftly, Macias sidestepped questions about the pay-to-play specter that accompanied the money Wapner was passing through to her.
“I feel if I am elected it will be my duty as a public official to do what is right by listening to the voters,” she said.
She said that Wapner giving her money to run for office was not a bad thing and it should not prevent her from holding office.
“People will say negative things, but I hope that won’t stop me from what I am trying to accomplish,” she said. “What you do out there comes back to you. Life is too good to be focusing on negative campaigning. People will say negative things but you should forget about that and think about what it is that you can accomplish.”
However much money Wapner or others lay out to help her or the competing candidates in District 4 to get their messages out, Macias said, it is the voters who will decide who will serve on the council. She said she wanted those voters “to clearly remember that everyone – not just me – who is running for the position is working hard and being bold and we all care about this city. Everyone who is running truly believes in trying to make a difference in our community. If one of them wins or I win I would still want to sit together and talk about what we can do for our community.”
Mayor Leon offered his belief that Macias would prove impervious to being influenced by the money that Wapner is passing along to her, by the support of her candidacy he, Wapner and Porada are providing or his past professional relationship with her.
“She has the strength and the inner guidance to stand on her own two feet,” Leon said.
-Mark Gutglueck