Maine ballot 2009 | News |

Maine attorney general rejects request to investigate legislative staff members

Posted on Thursday, October 29th, 2009, 2:28 am

On Monday, Oct. 26, nine days before Maine’s Nov. 3 election, a pro-TABOR group accused city and legislative staffers of criminal wrong-doing in connection with TABOR opposition.

Maine Attorney General Janet Mills rejected a request Monday from the TABOR Now campaign to investigate legislative staffers for illegally helping anti-TABOR campaigns, citing a lack of criminal wrong-doing. TABOR Now recently filed a complaint against the city of South Portland, which also concerned TABOR II.

TABOR Now asked Mills to investigate legislative staffers in the offices of House Speaker Hannah Pingree, D-North Haven, and Senate President Elizabeth Mitchell, D-Vassalboro. David Crocker, chairman of TABOR Now, accused staffers of illegally helping to organize anti-TABOR fundraising.

The accusations stem from an Aug. 12 meeting in Pingree’s office where several businesses were invited by Rick McCarthy of Maine Tomorrow, a for-profit consulting firm specializing in public policy research, governmental affairs, community development and association management. McCarthy contacted Pingree’s and Mitchell’s offices to request they host the meeting and attend to offer insight into the TABOR and excise tax legislation present on the ballot. Approximately 16 members of the construction, engineering and transportation community were invited to the meeting, as well as the state Transportation Committee. In an e-mail sent to William Brown, a staff worker in Pingree’s office, McCarthy said his ultimate goal was to raise funds from the businesses invited. In the invitation to the businesses, McCarthy wrote asking them to “join us to learn more and discuss how you can help defeat these short-sighted measures.”

“We had reason, it seemed, to indicate that there was illegal activity taking place in direct opposition to the citizens’ initiative [TABOR II],” Crocker said.

Days earlier, TABOR Now had filed an ethics complaint against South Portland because of a packet the city mailed to its voters. TABOR Now may seek a similar complaint as a follow-up to the accusation of Pingree and Mitchell’s office staff workers.

TABOR Now obtained information about the meeting through a Freedom Of Access Act request, which Crocker said proved staffers working in Pingree’s and Mitchell’s offices used legislative computers to “solicit reportable contributions” from businesses for anti-TABOR efforts.

“It’s their [Pingree’s and Mitchell’s] staff, and the meeting set up with the Transportation Committee was hosted by the two of them,” Crocker said, who said the meeting’s purpose was “ultimately to raise money.”

Kate Simmons, assistant to the attorney general, said there was “no criminal wrongdoing whatsoever.”

“Some of those business interests did contribute to that campaign,” Simmons said, “but not because they were asked to by legislative leadership.”

Simmons said it is important to note that staffers are not responsible for the e-mails they receive.

Tim Feeley, communications director for Pingree, said the meeting was a discussion of public policy, not an event for raising funds to be used against TABOR.

“They [Maine Tomorrow] were asking the speaker and the president to give their characterization of the TABOR legislation and how it would impact the legislative process,” Feeley said.

Feeley said staffers in both offices did not use legislative computers to solicit contributions to an anti-TABOR campaign.

“This was a request to attend a meeting. This is basically in the job description for legislators. This is what they do; and to allege that it’s criminal activity is just desperation,” Feeley said. “They’re alleging the kind of conspiracy that’s reserved for Bigfoot and alien sightings.”

Feeley acknowledged McCarthy is a lobbyist.

David Loughran, communications director for Mitchell, said the president was not asked to help solicit funding from business leaders for an anti-TABOR campaign and called the allegations “frivolous.”

“The TABOR campaign is down into the polls the eve of the Election Day, and they’re trying to throw a Hail Mary pass,” Loughran said.

Loughran said the event was a meeting between legislative leaders and Maine business leaders “to talk about economic policies affecting the state of Maine.”

Crocker said the meeting was closed to members of the press, but Feeley disagreed. He said the meeting was in a small, enclosed room, but reporters were not barred from it. He said a suggestion to move the meeting to a more spacious room was never acted upon.

Crocker said TABOR Now isn’t done pursuing the matter.

“I think we’re considering an ethics complaint at this point,” Crocker said.

Phone calls to McCarthy were not returned by press time.

In a similar move, TABOR Now recently filed a complaint with the state Ethics Commission against the city of South Portland, claiming it needs to register as a ballot question committee.

South Portland recently sent its taxpayers a packet announcing the city council’s recent decision to oppose both Question 4 and Question 2 — concerning the automobile excise tax — and asking voters to learn more at the city’s Web site. TABOR Now, in its e-mailed complaint from Chairman David Crocker to commission Executive Director Jonathan Wayne, said it is unlikely South Portland’s mailing cost less than $5,000. After exceeding $5,000 in election spending, any group in Maine must register as a ballot question committee and report to the Ethics Commission.

“The question that David Crocker [sent] is whether the city of South Portland should’ve registered with us as a ballot question committee and reported that expenditure,” said Paul Lavin, assistant director of the commission.

James Gailey, city manager of South Portland, said the mailing cost $564. He said Crocker’s complaint is unfounded.

“It didn’t seem like a whole lot was going on. … There was a lot of disconnect. There was a lot of belief by residents that the way the questions were worded were very attractive to the voter. As a response to all that we included into the tax bill mailing. … Quite simply just a one-page sheet that announced both the questions,” Gailey said. “We added two bullets under each which were completely straight up facts, and then on the bottom we said please learn more about these initiatives, and then we gave the city’s Web page.”

Gailey said the cost was six cents per sheet. He said the city will respond to the complaint this week and that state attorneys are drafting a response. He said he has not seen the response and does not know the exact day the city will release it.

“Is it appropriate for a municipality to send that type of advisory out with property tax bills?” Crocker asked, who called the move “not very subtle.”

Crocker questioned Gailey’s cost estimate of the mailing and whether it includes staff time to draft the advisory.

“[The packet] makes a little statement there about what the city thinks will be lost if the excise tax referendum will be passed … and then it sort of says, ‘Oh, by the way, here’s your property tax bill.’ Again, not very subtle,” Crocker said.

Gailey said the city’s Web site indicated the mailed packet includes the two ballot questions and both the proponent and opponent messages.