Florence Campaign Mailer Draws Criticism; Eichelberger Denies Responsibility

A political mailing targeting Florence candidates has prompted objections from its subjects and questions about who produced and financed it. City council candidate Ryan Eichelberger says he is being blamed for material he did not create.

“I have stated unequivocally that I have nothing to do with the mail piece,” Eichelberger wrote in messages to Siuslaw Country.

His denial is central to this account. This publication has obtained no evidence establishing that he commissioned, designed, approved, or financed the mailing.

Coast Radio reported October 26 that Common Sense Florence PAC distributed a political mailing over the preceding weekend targeting Renee Lo Pilato, Sally Wantz, and Justin Ludwig. According to that report, the candidates sent a letter to local media organizations and the Florence Area Chamber of Commerce describing the material as misleading and personally offensive and requesting opportunities to respond.

Those descriptions represent the candidates’ objections. Siuslaw Country has not independently established the accuracy or falsity of every assertion in the mailing.

One image obtained by this publication focuses on Wantz and Lo Pilato. It combines photographs, selected statements, and highlighted phrases to criticize positions attributed to them concerning diversity policies, environmental responsibility, and police staffing.

The material challenges their presentation of themselves as putting people over party. Whether its characterizations fairly represent the candidates requires comparison with their original statements and the surrounding context.

Eichelberger disputed the characterization of the material as a targeted attack.

“I am really perplexed that publicly posted pictures, by the various candidates on their social media pages is considered a targeted attack,” he wrote.

His response presents the material as criticism based on candidates’ public activity. The candidates’ objections challenge its presentation. The photographs’ public availability does not settle questions about the accompanying language or selection of quotations; those require examination of the complete communication.

Eichelberger also said he was being wrongly identified as responsible for the mailing. He attributed some of that confusion to answers generated by Meta AI and Google.

Siuslaw Country has not independently verified what those systems displayed or who relied on their responses. AI-generated answers do not establish authorship or responsibility for campaign advertising.

Responsibility requires evidence identifying who commissioned, produced, approved, or paid for the communication.

Common Sense Florence is registered in Oregon’s ORESTAR campaign-finance system as committee No. 25373. Its original statement of organization became effective October 20, 2026. The filing identifies Ronelle Kuert as director and states that the committee is not candidate-controlled.

That establishes Kuert’s listed leadership role. It does not establish who personally wrote, designed, approved, or financed the mailing.

Siuslaw Country contacted Kuert seeking clarification. As this article was prepared, no substantive response had been supplied for inclusion.

The publication also asked Intisar Strategies whether it had produced the material. Owner David Kilada expressly denied involvement.

“Ryan’s a client, but like I said, that mailer you sent me is not something we did for him or anyone,” Kilada wrote.

He also stated that Common Sense Florence PAC was not a client. Siuslaw Country has obtained no evidence contradicting those statements.

In his responses, Eichelberger also described alleged attacks involving his family, children, friends, and nonprofit organizations with which he works. He listed personal insults and attacks had been directed at him.

Siuslaw Country has not independently verified the authorship and context of those examples. Allegations against particular individuals require supporting evidence and an opportunity for those people to respond.

In his October 27 letter to the editor, titled “Enough,” Eichelberger distinguished criticism of candidates’ positions and leadership from attacks extending to their families, friends, workplaces, and community organizations.

The letter welcomed debate about housing, spending, growth, public safety, infrastructure, and Florence’s future while calling for an end to personal attacks.

That distinction matters. His letter does not condemn every negative advertisement or every criticism of a candidate. The alleged personal abuse and the disputed mailing present separate questions, each requiring its own evidence.

An October 27 ORESTAR transaction search for Common Sense Florence returned zero records. Its 2026 account summary displayed no contributions, expenditures, ending cash balance, or accounts payable.

Those results describe the database when it was examined. They do not establish that the committee incurred no expenses or missed a reporting deadline.

Oregon generally requires campaign transactions during the final 42 days before a general election to be reported within seven calendar days. Depending on the actual transaction dates, relevant deadlines might not yet have arrived when the database was checked.

The search therefore did not establish a reporting violation. Subsequent disclosures may identify the mailing’s funding and production expenses.

The evidence reviewed supports reporting that Common Sense Florence was publicly identified as responsible for the mailing, that its subjects objected to its presentation, and that Eichelberger denied involvement.

It does not support assigning the mailing’s production or financing to him.

Questions remain about who commissioned the material, selected and approved its content, produced it, and paid for its distribution. Committee records, invoices, and attributable explanations could resolve those questions.

Florence voters deserve accurate information about candidates and the communications seeking to influence their choices. That requires checking the mailing’s claims, establishing responsibility through evidence, and reporting explanations and denials fairly.