Did Ward Violate State Laws during Election Campaign?

 

Updated 11-12-07

Public Disclosure Commission

Formal Complaints Under Investigation 2007

These complaints are currently being investigated by the Public Disclosure Commission staff, unless otherwise noted.

Opened in November 2007

Bill Ward, Case #08-094

 

Formal complaints have been filed against Port Commissioner elect Bill Ward, for violating the Washington State Public Disclosure Law.

Most of us learned early in life, usually childhood, that naivety and ignorance of the law is no excuse for violating it. Either Bill Ward will claim this excuse, or has completely ignored the law and has decided to do whatever he darn well pleases, regardless of the Law.

Either way, this man wants to become your Port Commissioner, yet it appears, he can’t even obey the law trying to get elected.

As VP of the fringe activist group CCIA, Wards’ group are strong proponents of “transparent government”, public meetings, public rights of disclosure and working for the public’s best interest. Ward’s campaign is centered around “Honest and open government”, Yet Bill Ward doesn’t practice what he preaches. He’s hidden his campaign behind vague numbers, no numbers, fuzzy math and now violates state law by hindering public inspection of his campaign finances and non-reporting.

“The public’s right to know of the financing of political campaigns and lobbying and the financial affairs of elected officials and candidates far outweighs any right that these matters remain secret and private.” RCW 42.17.010 (10)

It has been a concern of many people during the past few weeks, just how Bill Ward could put up all those signs 300-400, advertise in the Columbian, Post Record, Insert glossy full page inserts into the paper for three weeks, Mail glossy direct mail pieces to area residents, rent two reader boards on Hwy 14….all for less than $3500.00 !

It can’t be done. Some say, “well, he used his own money”. Some say “he received in-kind donations”, some say “donations paid for it”. That’s fine, legal and acceptable. EXCEPT, this information is ALL required by law to be written down, available for public inspection and once exceeding $3500, reported to the PDC. Failure to do so is a violation of State law.

Ward filed his PDC candidate filings under the Mini- Campaign Reporting laws.

THE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE LAW Adopted as Initiative 276 in 1972 Codified as Chapter 42.17 Revised Code of Washington:

“The mini reporting option limits candidates and political committees to raising and spending no more than $3,500, not including the filing fee. In addition, under mini reporting no contributor may give more than $300 in the aggregate, except for candidates giving to their own campaigns.”

“The term “expenditure” includes a payment, contribution, subscription, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value. It includes a contract, promise or agreement, whether or not legally enforceable, to make expenditure.

The term “expenditure” also includes a promise to pay, a payment or a transfer of anything of value in exchange for goods, services, property, facilities, or anything of value for the purpose of assisting, benefiting, or honoring any public official or candidate, or assisting in furthering or opposing any election campaign.

In-Kind Contributions

Monetary contributions are not the only things of value received by campaigns. Frequently, contributors will donate goods and services in lieu of or in addition to their monetary donations

The contribution’s fair market value is the amount a well-informed buyer or lessee, willing but not obligated to buy or lease, would pay; and what a well-informed seller, or lessor, willing but not obligated to sell or lease, would accept.

Generally, this means the amount the contributor would ordinarily expect to receive if someone were paying him or her to provide the item or service. For example, if a candidate is given materials by a local retail hardware store for the construction of yard signs, an in-kind contribution has been made equal to the current retail sales price of the materials.

However, if the business donating the materials is a wholesale supplier, the in-kind contribution is equal to the amount this wholesaler charges its customers for the materials.” PDC

Let’s dissect this a little bit:

1. A double-sided, 8 l/2 X 11, 4-color, glossy flyer was inserted in the October 16 and October 23 edition of the Camas Post Record, circulation 9770 per their website. Cost for insert is $34 per 1,000. Printing cost for insert, per Minuteman Press, is $2120 +/_ $200. These are reasonable cost quotes.

2. Mr. Ward lists a total of $679.40 paid to Columbia Litho for printing. The only apparent printing for Mr. Ward was the 8 1/2 X 11, 4-color, glossy flyer referred to above. Florence Hutson at the Post-Record indicates 20,000 flyers would be needed for insertions into 2 editions. The Gray campaign also used Columbia Litho for a mass mailing. They had printed 9100 copies, 6 X 11, black and white, lightweight card stock for $589.69. It is not logical for 10,900 more copies of Mr. Ward’s 2-sided, 4-color, glossy flyer to cost $90 more than the first order. If this was the actual amount paid (which no receipt was provided), then there should be “in-kind” listed for the difference between the cost charged Bill Ward for his printing and the cost to any other person for a comparable printing job.

3. Checking again with the Post-Record, in order to have a flyer put into their weekly paper, including subscribers and newsstands, one would have to supply 10,000 flyers for each issue. The cost for inserting a flyer would be $340 per issue. Mr. Ward had a flyer in three consecutive weeks, for a total of $1020, yet he only lists $355.20 payment to the Post. hmmmm.

4. Double-sided political signs, 18″ X 24″, quantity estimate 300-400. Quote from International Graphics, $3.10 a piece for 300; $2.95 a piece for 400. Stakes 2″X 2″, 4 ft, pointed, quote from Washougal Lumber $1.10 each.

5. Mr. Ward lists a total paid of $679.40 to Promotional Apparel. When asked, he stated it was for signs. We have checked the Internet and all of the Vancouver-Portland phone books and have not been able to locate this company. Since they were not allowed to see a receipt, we can only estimate his cost based on the number of his signs displayed around the area compared to the number of Gray signs displayed and based on the prices they paid.

6. Mr. Ward does not show any expenditure for the 2″X 2″; 4 ft. stakes he used to mount his signs. Again, if they were donated, the fair market value must be listed. It’s not.

7. 2-column, 3 inch ad in the Sunday edition of The Columbian, Oct. 14, $379; same size ad in Saturday Oct. 20, edition of Columbian, $323.34.

8. Rental on portable reader board, owned by Chuck’s Auto Body Towing, beginning Oct. 17, $100 per week, still on display. (3 weeks = $300)

There is nothing listed in his “record” to show either rental fees or in-kind contributions for the portable reader board or GK Rentals board.

Additional expenditures observed and not accounted for include:

Printed shirts

extra flyers distributed at debates and community functions

Buttons

Reader Board @ GK Rentals on Hwy 14 - There was nothing listed either as a contribution in kind or as an expense for the billboard on Hwy 14

Exterior wood stakes (in-kind donation?)

Estimated expenditures

 

Two individuals called Bill Ward and requested an appointment on Oct. 28 to review Mr. Ward’s campaign financial records pursuant to RCW 42.17.080.

They attempted to reach Mr. Ward to make an appointment with him for the following day. Three times they were refused the opportunity to speak to him by phone. The fourth call was switched to voice mail. They left the message that in pursuant to the RCW he had to make his financial records available and they would meet him at 11:00 a.m. the following day. Later that evening he returned the call and agreed to meet with the two individuals at 5:00 p.m. on October 29. Upon their arrival they were allowed to look at one sheet of notebook paper. This paper was divided into two parts, i.e., expenses and donations. Names and amounts were listed for both. (See below) He was asked to see receipts but was told they were in some other files with his business papers. He was asked to see his bank statements and said that he hadn’t opened a separate account for the campaign. He was asked what some of the expenditures were for and his reply was evasive and vague. It sure sounds like the same actions the CCIA blames the current Port Commissioners of doing. Hmmmmmm? This is all coming from the same man who wants the Port to be “transparent”.

Below is a list of Campaign contributors and expenses that Bill Ward has chosen to identify. Notice who is not on the list? Answer: Most of the CCIA executives.

Are they NOT supporting Ward for election? Why haven’t they chosen to make a contribution? OR did Bill Ward just “forget” to include them on his contributions statement?

There were no dates listed. Who made up the difference between contributions and expenditures? Where are the rest of the expenses? Why are the figures so different than our research above?

Expenditures Contributions

Vista Print 5.95 + 18.75 Johnson Dairy, LLC – 300

Columbia Litho 84.4 + 595 Craig Knapp – 300

Post Record 355.20 Roger Daniels – 300

Promotional Apparel – 475 + 205.39 Walt Cuetter – 100

Columbian – 379.6 + 323.34 Pat Rice – 100

Lutz Hardware – 20 CSI – 100

Bernice Pluchos – 25

Cheryl Kenny – 125

Total – $2,462.63 Total – $1,350.00

Fuzzy Math which doesn’t add up anyway you look at it.

Public Inspection of Campaign Records (from PDC regulations)

showing all contributions received, expenditures made and outstanding debts must be current within one

business day. Further, they must be open for public inspection by anyone who wants to see them. These books must be available for inspection on weekdays beginning on the eighth day before the election (excluding legal holidays) by appointment between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. at the location designated by the campaign on the registration statement (C-1). An appointment must be allowed within twenty-four hours of the request. If a candidate has selected Mini reporting (BILL WARD HAS) and opted to use his or her personal checking account for campaign activity,(BILL WARD HAS) then he or she has to make the check register and other records of the personal account available for public inspection. (BILL WARD HAS NOT)

The separate list of contributors giving $25 or less does not need to be included with the records open for public inspection. However, all other “books of account” of the campaign must be current within one business day and be made available for public inspection. The campaign books include its checkbook register and any ledgers, journals or lists identifying contributors (and the date and amount each has given) as well as books showing any outstanding debts (including loans and orders placed but not yet paid). If these types of books are not kept, the campaign is expected to make available the documents that are customarily used to create these books of account; that is, the receipts, invoices, copies of contribution checks, notes or documents regarding orders placed or loans, etc.

If the campaign books are kept on computer, any person wanting to see the books must be given sufficient instruction to enable him or her to examine these books. The campaign is not required to make copies of its books, whether the books are kept on paper or in electronic form.

Did Ward Violate State Laws during the Election Campaign? You do the math and decide.

Do you trust Bill Wards open and honest government conduct to represent you as your Port Commissioner?

http://www.pdc.wa.gov/archive/compliance/complaints/pdf/2007/08-094.pdf

25 Comments

Filed under CW Port Issues, Community

Tags: , campaign finances, Ward