ELECTION 2018: Montebello Councilwoman Vivian Romero Paid Partner Over $26,000 From Campaign Committee Funds

BY BRIAN HEWS
Saturday September, 29, 2018, 6:30 pm

Shannan Calland, Montebello Planning Commissioner and partner of current Montebello City Councilwoman Vivian Romero, is the President and Founder of SHC Collective, “a full-service boutique consulting firm that addresses important social needs with an approach that is efficient, effective and financially sustainable.”

Shannan Calland

California Secretary of State records show that Calland filed for incorporation just 11 months ago, in Dec. 2017 with an address off the 101 freeway on Cahengua Blvd. in Los Angeles.

But further research into SHC Collective shows little else for what should be a robust company presence, both brick and mortar and online, for a firm such as SHC Collective.

Los Angeles County records do not show a fictitious business name filing under SHC Consulting or SHC Collective.

Calland tweets very little under her Twitter handle @ and she does not have a SHC Consulting or SHC Collective Twitter handle.

SHC’s Facebook page has only two posts, the last post Aug 24 uploading SHC’s logo; and suspiciously that page has only one “like.”

A “Learn More” button on SHC’s Facebook page, as well a URL listed on Calland’s Twitter page, directs users to www.shccollective.com.

Editor’s note: After the article was published, Calland  put up her website.

But that address lands on a Wix page that states, “looks like this domain isn’t connected to a website yet,” showing that SHC Consulting, in this day and age, does not have a functioning website.

The landing page after clicking on shccollective.com, after posting this story, Calland fixed the site. The picture is a screenshot using a MAC computer, MAC’s timestamp the screenshot.

Despite SHC’s lack of social media and professional presence, two campaign committees formed by Calland’s partner Vivian Romero – Romero for Montebello City Council and Romero for Senate 2018-have paid Calland over $26,000.

And one recent payment to Calland will raise eyebrows in the District Attorney’s money laundering unit: in August of this year Romero paid Calland, who’s own company does not have a website, $1,500 for “information technology costs (internet and email) and Website design and set-up.”

Campaign finance documents from the California Secretary of State’s website show that Romero’s Senate campaign committee paid Calland $13,500 just four months after Calland filed for incorporation of SHC, paying her $4,500 in April, $4,500 in May, and $4,500 in June of this year.

The payments were marked “Campaign Consulting.”

Two payments for over $1,000 to Calland were marked “reimbursement.”

Lastly, Romero paid Calland over $10,000 for presumably paying her filing fees and campaign statement, although it is unclear why the committee would reimburse Calland and not pay the fees directly from the committee’s bank account.

When texted, Romero only defended Calland saying, “she has tons of experience.” When asked about the questionable optics of paying her partner Romero said, “maybe so, but I had to pay professionals I can trust, we always have to pay for experienced people.”

This is not the first time Romero has been involved with her partner when it comes to financial matters.

During the summer of 2017, it was alleged that Romero harassed a former employer of Calland, Tai Sunnanon, calling him five times and claiming he owed money to her and Calland.

The problems between the two culminated at the Independent Cities conference in Santa Barbara when Romero allegedly rammed her left shoulder into Sunnanon and then whispered, “you’re going to get it.”

Later at the conference, Romero allegedly yelled out slurs against Sunnanon, which included “liar” and “thief.”

Sunnanon later filed a restraining order that was finally rejected by Santa Monica Superior Court Judge Hank M. Goldberg in April 2018.

In rejecting the order, Goldberg compared Romero’s actions to “that of a junior high student,” and called Romero’s actions “disagreeable conduct.”