SWORN COMPLAINT  AGAINST ANN HODGE AND AGREED UPON RESOLUTION:

 

http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/sworncomp/2006/2611231.pdf

 

 

SWORN COMPLAINT AND RESOLUTION:

 

 

TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION SC-2610216 AND SC-2611231

ORDER AND AGREED RESOLUTION

 

IN THE MATTER OF § BEFORE THE

§

ANN HODGE, § TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION

§

RESPONDENT § SC-2610216 and SC-2611231

ORDER

and

AGREED RESOLUTION

I. Recitals

The Texas Ethics Commission (the commission) met on April 13, 2007, to consider sworn

complaints SC-2610216 and SC-2611231. A quorum of the commission was present. The

commission determined that there is credible evidence of violations of section 253.037 of the

Election Code, a law administered and enforced by the commission. To resolve and settle this

complaint without further proceedings, the commission proposes this resolution to the respondent.

II. Allegations

The complaints allege that the respondent, as treasurer of a general-purpose political committee,

made political expenditures exceeding $500 within 60 days of the committee filing a campaign

treasurer appointment and before the committee had accepted contributions from 10 different

persons, and that the respondent made political contributions to another general-purpose committee

without first disclosing the recipient committee on its campaign treasurer appointment

III. Facts Supported by Credible Evidence

Credible evidence available to the commission supports the following findings of fact:

1. The respondent’s general-purpose political committee, Partners for Progress, filed a

campaign treasurer appointment on July 21, 2006, naming the respondent as its treasurer.

The treasurer appointment did not list any recipient general-purpose committees.

2. On October 10, 2006, the committee filed a 30-day pre-election campaign finance report that

disclosed a total of $40 of unitemized political contributions. The same report disclosed that

the committee accepted a $50,000 political contribution on August 21, 2006, and a $15,000

political contribution on September 19, 2006. The report also disclosed that the committee

made a single $2,084.84 political expenditure on August 24, 2006.

3. On October 19, 2006, Partners for Progress filed an amended treasurer appointment that

added “Keep Investing in District Schools” as a recipient general-purpose committee.

4. Partners for Progress filed an 8-day pre-election report on November 1, 2006, that discloses

two political expenditures made as political contributions totaling $14,826.67 to “Keep

Investing in District Schools (K.I.D.S).” The political contributions were made on October

11, 2006, and October 17, 2006.

5. Commission records show that “Keep Investing in District Schools” is a general-purpose

political committee with the acronym “KIDS.” The complaint alleges that the contributions

were improper because the recipient was not disclosed in the respondent’s campaign

treasurer appointment.

6. Both SC-2610216 and SC-2611231 allege that the $2,084.84 political expenditure was

improper because the respondent made the expenditure within 60 days of the date that the

committee’s treasurer appointment was filed and before the committee had accepted political

contributions from 10 persons.

7. SC-2611231 also alleges that the committee’s later political expenditures were improper

because the two itemized contributions plus the $40 of unitemized contributions disclosed on

the respondent’s October 10, 2006, report did not actually represent that the respondent

complied with the statutory requirement to accept contributions from at least 10 different

persons before exceeding $500 in political expenditures.

8. The respondent filed a sworn response in which she acknowledges that she made the August

24, 2006, expenditure of $2,084.84 within 60 days of the committee filing its campaign

treasurer appointment and before the committee had accepted contributions from 10 persons.

9. The evidence indicates that between August 24, 2006, and October 10, 2006, Partners for

Progress accepted contributions totaling $40 from eight individuals.

IV. Findings and Conclusions of Law

The facts described in Section III support the following findings and conclusions of law:

1. A general-purpose committee may not knowingly make or authorize a political contribution

or political expenditure unless the committee has filed its campaign treasurer appointment

not later than the 60th day before the date the contribution or expenditure is made and

accepted political contributions from at least 10 persons. ELEC. CODE § 253.037(a). In

harmonizing various statutes the commission determined that a general-purpose committee

may make political expenditures that do not exceed $500 during the 60 day period and before

the committee has accepted contributions from 10 persons. See Ethics Advisory Opinion No.

161 (1993).

2. With respect to the August 24, 2006, $2,084.84 expenditure, the evidence shows that the

respondent made a political expenditure exceeding $500 within 60 days of the committee

filing its campaign treasurer appointment and before accepting contributions from 10

persons. Therefore, there is credible evidence that the respondent violated section 253.037(a)

of the Election Code, as alleged in sworn complaints SC-2610216 and SC-2611231.

3. With respect to the remaining expenditures, they were made more than 60 days after the

committee filed its treasurer appointment. The evidence shows that the $40 of unitemized

contributions was from eight contributors. Thus, when those eight contributions are added to

the two itemized contributions the respondent met the 10 person requirement. Therefore,

there is credible evidence that the respondent did not violate section 253.037(a) of the

Election Code with respect to the committee’s political expenditures made in October 2006,

as alleged in sworn complaint SC-2611231.

4. A general-purpose committee may not knowingly make a political contribution to another

general-purpose committee unless the other committee is listed in the campaign treasurer

appointment of the contributor committee. ELEC. CODE § 253.037(b).

5. Partners for Progress amended its campaign treasurer appointment on October 19, 2006, to

disclose “KIDS” as a recipient general-purpose committee. However, the evidence shows

that the respondent made political contributions totaling $14,826.67, to KIDS before making

the proper disclosure. Therefore, there is credible evidence that the respondent violated

section 253.037(b) of the Election Code, as alleged in sworn complaint SC-2611231

 

This order and agreed resolution describes violations that the commission has determined are neither

technical nor de minimis. Accordingly, this order and agreed resolution is not confidential under

section 571.140 of the Government Code and may be disclosed by members and staff of the

commission.

VII. Sanction

After considering the seriousness of the violations described under Sections III and IV, including the

nature, circumstances, and consequences of the violations, and after considering the sanction

necessary to deter future violations, the commission imposes a $1,000 civil penalty.

VIII. Order

The commission hereby orders that if the respondent consents to the proposed resolution, this order

and agreed resolution is a final and complete resolution of SC-2610216 and SC-2611231.