State watchdogs will take several more days to determine whether political committees failed to accurately disclose how much they spent collecting signatures on a series of ballot measures.
Let’s Go Washington on Thursday failed to provide details on how it funded signature gathering for six statewide efforts, including three that will go before voters in Washington next month. He fended off allegations that he violated state campaign finance laws.
The state Public Information Commission charged that the political committee failed to “timely and accurately” report spending on each ballot measure and failed to obtain and disclose information about subcontractors paid by petition companies. A time trial was held.
And the committee is also accused of “failing to produce campaign records in a timely manner” as requested by committee staff. A subpoena issued in July forced Let’s Go Washington to produce 9,000 pages of materials for the watchdog agency’s compliance chief.
Commissioners met briefly in closed session Thursday before leaving without making a ruling.
Commissioner Allen Heyward announced before adjourning the special meeting that he planned to release a written opinion within a week.
“Let’s Go Washington” could be fined up to $10,000 for each violation.
Callie Castillo, a lawyer for a political committee founded by hedge fund billionaire Brian Haywood, argued that the charges should be dismissed. He said in the committee’s final statement that “every dollar spent by every company on the initiative” was disclosed in a timely manner.
The political committee has complied with numerous requests, including amendments to the report, but Mr. Castillo, the committee staffer, said it is “trying to punish Let’s Go Washington for doing exactly what it was told.” . That’s not fair. That’s not required by law. ”
Assistant Attorney General Chad Standifer, who represents agency officials, said the public was deprived of important information because spending details were not disclosed until the effort was certified. “Voters reviewing the commission’s report have no way of knowing what initiatives a particular spending is supporting,” he said in his closing argument.
A long-simmering feud
The roots of the controversy stem from Let’s Go Washington’s success last year in gathering hundreds of thousands of signatures from registered voters for six initiatives in Congress. Lawmakers adopted three guidelines: police pursuits, parental rights and taxes.
Voters on Nov. 5 will decide the fate of three other parties seeking to abolish the capital gains tax and cap-and-trade system, and to make the state’s new long-term care program voluntary.
In July 2023, a coalition of progressive groups opposed to the voting system known as “Defend Washington” accused Let’s Go Washington of failing to disclose details about what went into and out of committee coffers for each of the six initiatives. filed a complaint.
Among their claims is that by using Heywood’s “deep pockets” as a near-exclusive source of funding, the committee avoided the need to submit periodic contribution reports.
Lawyers representing SEIU 775, Washington Conservation Action, Planned Parenthood and Civic Ventures have advocated for action by the commission before the election. In July, they pressed the commissioners to refer the case to the Washington Attorney General’s office, but they declined, in part because staff had not completed their investigation.
Freedom of Information Committee staff filed an administrative complaint on September 9th. This sets the stage for Thursday’s hearing on how Let’s Go Washington tracked spending on six measures in 2023.
The political committee’s initial report treated signature gathering for all six policies as a single project, lumping together the amount raised and the amount spent. Earlier this year, at the request of committee staff, the committee amended nearly two dozen reports detailing the amounts raised and spent for each individual initiative. Most of the spending for 2023 was simply split into six parts.
Tracking the Funds Thursday’s most high-profile accusations include Let’s Go Washington, Your Choice Petitions, Allstate Petition Management, Collective Voice Solutions and TDM Strategies, a total of 1,000 companies. It involved transactions with four petition companies that netted nearly $10,000.
Mr. Standifer spared no effort from the political committee to gather information from each committee regarding payments to subcontractors as required by state law.
Phil Stutzman, the commission’s veteran compliance officer, said the companies were not cooperating with the investigation. However, in testimony, Your Choice Petitions executives said in a telephone conversation that they admitted to using sub-vendors. And Stutzman said an email from another company’s leader seemed to imply they were as well.
Standifer said Let’s Go Washington has requested details from Roy Ruffino, the chief executive of Allstate Petition Management, but that what the political committee is seeking is “confidential information. He pointed out that he received a curt reply saying, “This is outside the scope of the reason for disclosing it to everyone.”
Standifer noted that political committee leaders did not push back after Rufino was hired in April for a $120,000-a-year staff position.
Let’s Go Washington leaders claim they didn’t know about the subcontractor spending, so they couldn’t have violated reporting laws.
“Let’s Go Washington has decided to turn a blind eye when it comes to reporting requirements,” Standifer told the committee, criticizing the committee for refusing to follow up or asking questions.
Castillo said Let’s Go Washington has conducted its due diligence but has not received any reportable information from the vendor. She claimed that commission staff also had not provided proof of payments.
“(Staff) relies solely on its own assumptions and conjecture as to whether such sub-vendors should exist, but not on whether they actually did exist,” she said.
