The dust had barely settled in a tightly contested race in a north Phoenix legislative district when a voter urged state election officials to investigate the apparent Republican winner for alleged campaign finance offenses serious enough to jeopardize the candidate’s right to take office.
Former state Rep. Doug Quelland defeated incumbent House Democrat Jackie Thrasher in a race likely to be decided by fewer than 700 votes. Rep. Jim Weiers also won re-election in the district, garnering the most votes of any candidate.
But about a week after the election, Carol Vandercook, a District 10 Democrat, claimed Quelland had violated campaign finance laws by hiring a consultant prior to filing his intent to run for office in April 2007.
Vandercook charged that Quelland entered into a $15,000 contract with the consultant to provide Web site services and other campaign services, according to a complaint filed Nov. 12 with the Secretary of State’s Office and the Citizens Clean Election Commission.
The complaint included what appeared to be a copy of the contract between Quelland and Intermedia Public Relations, a firm operated by Larry Davis. The contract appears to have been approved mutually in March 2007, and called for the first payment for services to be made by May.
Quelland, meanwhile, said he did nothing wrong and that he terminated the contract with Intermedia Public Relations within 24 hours after signing the contract. He said he no longer wanted to do business with the firm because it had dug up personal information about Thrasher’s family and intended to use it against her in the campaign.
Quelland said the consultant freely agreed to terminate the contract.
“My campaign or me personally have never paid him a dime for anything,” said Quelland, calling the complaint “moot,” before abruptly ending a telephone interview with the Arizona Capitol Times.
Davis refused comment when contacted Nov. 17.
Vandercook said the complaint and a copy of the contract were circulating in e-mails throughout the district, and said she voluntarily filed the documents because “it is something that needed to be addressed.”
Vandercook said she did not know who had authored the document. But a day later, Jim Barton, an election lawyer working with a firm routinely used by the Arizona Democratic Party, took credit for writing the complaint and said he had been retained by Vandercook to do so.
By state law, candidates must register campaign committees before spending any money, accepting contributions or engaging in other campaign-related activities, such as distributing literature or circulating nominating petitions.
According to state records, Quelland did not register his campaign committee until April 25, 2007, and no expenditures to Davis’ consulting business were listed on any of the candidate’s campaign finance reports.
Still, Quelland’s campaign Web site noted the site was created by Intermedia Public Relations.
Quelland ran as a Clean Elections candidate and appeared years ago on a public broadcast documentary hailing the state’s campaign finance system, which distributes public funds to qualified candidates who agree to forego private campaign contributions.
Vandercook claims the pre-primary election spending was significant enough to trigger a state law that would require Quelland’s removal because the amount is greater than 10 percent of his total adjusted primary and general election campaign-funding allotments.
Known in political circles, as the “death penalty,” the punishment prescribed by the Clean Elections Act has been levied only once since 1998, when the law went into effect.
In 2006, Republican District 7 Rep. David Burnell Smith was ejected from office for overspending his 2004 primary campaign by $6,000 and maintaining vague campaign finance records.
Todd Lang, executive director of the Citizens Clean Elections Commission, and Joseph Kanefield, the state elections director under Secretary of State Jan Brewer, declined to comment on the merits of the complaint against Quelland because the representative-elect has not been given an opportunity to respond officially.
“At this point, it is still an allegation,” said Kanefield, who added the Secretary of State’s Office will contact Quelland by mail within several days.
Vandercook suggested in the complaint that Quelland could be fined between $60,000 and $443,000 for violating financial limits applied to his personal contribution amounts, aggregate early contributions and primary election spending.
The higher figure takes into account daily penalties and compounding multipliers that can be levied in civil cases involving violations of campaign finance reporting requirements.
The Clean Elections Act allows fines up to ten times the amount candidates exceed spending limits, and Vandercook’s complaint alleges Quelland exceeded his personal contribution limit by $14,390, his aggregate early contribution limit by $14,060 and his primary spending limit by $14,938, combining for a total of $43,388.
Under commission rules, however, civil penalties cannot exceed 200 percent of the amount of the expenditure or contribution violation.
Thrasher, the incumbent who lost to Quelland, said she had no involvement with the complaint. She said anonymous e-mails and letters detailing the allegations against her Republican competitor had been circulating in the district for some time.
“I can’t imagine it to be true,” she said, adding Quelland is known for being a “staunch supporter of Clean Elections.”
Thrasher said she was not made aware of the complaint until after its filing. She said she was contacted by Vandercook, who “thought I should know about it.”
On Jan. 26, 2006, Smith was ordered by the Arizona Supreme Court to vacate his office by midnight after fighting a lengthy court battle that tested the authority of the Citizens Clean Elections Commission to remove sitting lawmakers.
Smith, an attorney, also was ordered to pay a $10,000 fine and repay $34,000 given to his campaign by the state. However, that amount was reduced after Smith appealed to the Citizens Clean Elections Commission.
Smith’s departure made him the first sitting legislator in the United States to be removed from office for a campaign finance-related offense.