An election flier distributed in Isla Vista by Brooks Firestone’s campaign this weekend was “blatantly lying” in its attacks on him, 3rd District supervisor candidate John Buttny said.

The flier, titled “John Buttny, 18 Years of Broken Promises,” which was disseminated throughout I.V. this past weekend, charges that Buttny “…laundered thousands of dollars in donations from one of the largest landlords in Isla Vista (BDC Management) into his own campaign…” Firestone’s campaign staff said the money laundering refers to Buttny’s acceptance of contributions from the Committee to Support Gail Marshall, which took money from BDC Management’s owner two years ago during the special recall election against the 3rd District supervisor.

Jeff Bermant, owner of BDC Management, said he donated a few thousand dollars to help Marshall fight the recall but has not donated any money to Buttny’s current campaign for Marshall’s seat on the board of supervisors.

“It shows that they’re lying,” Buttny said. “Jeff Bermant offered me $5,000, which I declined. We have not taken any money from landlords.”

Ken Poole, Firestone’s campaign manager, said the flier was necessary to let voters know that since Gail Marshall took $2,500 from Bermant in 2002, and the Committee to Support Gail Marshall gave $1,000 to Buttny this year, Buttny is receiving landlord money that’s been “laundered” through Gail Marshall.

“I think it’s information that students need to know before they vote,” Poole said. “Bermant never gave directly to Buttny, but the fact that Gail Marshall took money from Jeff Bermant – that’s tainted money.”

Buttny’s most recent campaign finance records from the County Elections Division do not show any contribution from Bermant.

“I haven’t given Buttny a dime,” Bermant said. “Both [Buttny and Firestone] are decent guys. That’s the reason I stayed out of this.”

While the flier stated that Buttny “laundered thousands,” finance records show at most he only received $1,000 from the Committee to Support Gail Marshall. Firestone and Poole said the language was not misleading and the difference was semantic.