Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutElection Violation Complaint Records - resolved without litigation - Weiers 2020 - 7/21/2020Glendale City Clerk July 20, 2020 Delivered by Email Re: Campaign Disclosure Complaint To Whom It May Concern: I am responding to a second complaint that appears to be an extension of the original EC 20- 002. It appears to take issue with an additional mailer that went out with the wrong disclaimer. I believe we have already addressed that piece in our original response, and that that was the piece we attempted to stop but were unable to stop in time. We attached then and reattaching here the screenshot of our mail vender attempting to stop it before it went out. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no further errors and our disclaimers have been 100% accurate. As mentioned in our previous response, this was an inadvertent error that in no way misled or harmed any Glendale voters and would still request that the complaint be dismissed with no further action. As before, should your office disagree and want to proceed, we would formally request an informal settlement conference at your first opportunity. Many thanks for your attention to this matter. We standby if you have any questions and look forward to a speedy resolution. Respectfully, Jerry Weiers Weiers 2020 Charles Foy Glendale, AZ 85306 July 23, 2020 Via Email Ms. Julie Bowers City Clerk City of Glendale 5850 W. Glendale Avenue Glendale, AZ 85301 Re: Arizona State Election Law Violations – Complaint #20-003 Dear Ms. Bowers: Having received, and reviewed, the response to Complaint #20-003 that I filed against Weiers 2020 on July 13, 2020, I am still not convinced that Weiers 2020 made a simple mistake with regards to the allegation in the complaint. Mr. Weiers in his response in part states, “As mentioned in our previous response, this was an inadvertent error that in no way misled or harmed any Glendale voters and would still request that the complaint be dismissed with no further action.” Perhaps Mr. Weiers does not understand the full scope of the issues in this complaint (and those raised in Complaint #20-002 since he raised it in his response). Quite apparently, at least one Glendale voter, me, ‘was misled and harmed’ in that I had to do my own research to find out who sent the mail piece. And during my own research, I expended time, and energy, to learn it was not sent by Weiers 2020, the current registered campaign committee for Mr. Weiers. Instead, it appeared to have been sent by a campaign committee that was closed in 2017. The disclosure on the now four (4) mail pieces clearly stated Paid for by Weiers for Mayor - Authorized by Jerry Weiers (emphasis added). Mr. Weiers assertion that his was an ‘oversight’ begs to have a reasonable person believe that a total of four (4) campaign mail pieces sent on his behalf with “Authorized by Jerry Weiers” was not ‘wilful’ as defined in the statute. I disagree and demand Mr. Weiers be held accountable for his ‘wilful’ actions that were clearly as shown in print, “Authorized by Jerry Weiers.” Campaign Finance Law Violation Complaint 20-003 Response Weiers 2020 Committee July 23, 2020 Page 2 of 2 Arizona Revised Statute 16-925. - Advertising and fund-raising disclosure statements: A. A person that makes an expenditure for an advertisement or fund-raising solicitation, other than an individual, shall include the following disclosures in the advertisement or solicitation: 1. The words "paid for by", followed by the name of the person making the expenditure for the advertisement or fund-raising solicitation. With regards to Mr. Weiers request for an ‘informal settlement conference,’ I am adamantly opposed to such ‘informal settlement conference’ and request you follow the statute as outlined: 16-938.E. Only after receiving a referral from the filing officer, the enforcement officer may: 1. Conduct an investigation using the enforcement officer's subpoena powers, except that the enforcement officer shall not compel a person to file campaign finance reports unless the enforcement officer has determined that the person is a committee. 2. Serve the alleged violator with a notice of violation. The notice shall state with reasonable particularity the nature of the violation, shall specify the penalty imposed and shall require compliance within twenty days after the date of issuance of the notice. The enforcement officer shall impose a presumptive civil penalty equal to the value or amount of money that has been received, spent or promised in violation of this article and articles 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 of this chapter, except that after a finding of special circumstances, the enforcement officer may impose a penalty of up to three times the amount of the presumptive civil penalty, based on the severity, extent or wilful nature of the alleged violation. If the notice of violation requires a person to file campaign finance reports, the reports are not required to be filed until the enforcement officer's notice of violation has been upheld after any timely appeal. In closing, if indeed you are acting as the enforcement officer in this matter as defined in the statute, I suggest that you have a distinct Conflict of Interest in making any decisions on the validity of the complaint listed in #20-003. I therefore request this complaint be referred out of Glendale to either the office of Maricopa County Attorney, or Arizona Attorney General. Respectfully submitted, Charles Foy City of Glendale Registered Voter