The state ethics commission has started work on developing standards for deciding what justifies waiving civil penalties for the late filing of campaign finance reports.
The commission is trying to bring clarity to a process that one member of the panel said seemed like a “beauty pageant.”
The panel is studying what waivers other states provide for either failing to file a timely campaign finance report or not submitting one altogether.
Violating the law for an individual candidate or campaign treasurer can carry a fine of up to $10 a day that the report is not filed up to $300 maximum.
Since 2018, failure to file a timely primary and general election campaign finance report can carry a civil penalty of $100 for the first day and $50 for each day the report remains unfiled up to a maximum of $1000.
Lobbyists can face a fine of $100 for the first day and $50 for each subsequent day up to a maximum fine of $1,000.
The statute says the commission “may waive, for good cause, payment of any civil penalty imposed…”
The commission wants to develop clearer guidance that would give candidates and lobbyists an idea of what they can expect if they seek a waiver of the fine.
It also has looked at the possibility of requiring anyone seeking a waiver of a civil penalty to complete a form that they would complete under oath.
“I’m not tied to any kind of voting or anything of that nature,” said Commissioner Christopher Burger, one of the newer members of the panel.
“As I’ve been observing what’s going on, it feels more like a personal preference and beauty pageant sort of approach as to whether something is waived, something is not, which provides no assistance to staff, provides no assistance to the people we’re here to aid,” Burger told the committee.
“It either needs to be a big deal or not,” he said.
Commissioner Kyle Krull, who’s been on the panel since 2011, pushed back on the connotation of the “beauty pageant” description.
“The notion of a beauty pageant doesn’t mean there’s been any favoritism,” Krull said.
Krull said the members are nonpartisan and bipartisan. He said anyone from the outside who walked into a commission meeting wouldn’t know who appointed them to the panel.
“Everything’s been impartial,” Krull said. “We’ve tried to do our best and take it case by case and very carefully look at all the facts.”
He added, “At this point, I think we would benefit from a having a bit more of a systematic approach for those we serve as well as those around the table.”
Mark Skoglund, executive director of the ethics commission, prepared a report that gives some sense about why the commission waives civil penalties.
From 2019 to 2022, there have been 156 civil penalty waivers requested.
Of those, 83, or 53%,were granted. Forty-two, or 27%, were partially granted and 31, or 20%, were denied.
Here are the reasons that were cited in asking for a waiver and how they fared:
Inactivity: The entity in question had no activity and sometimes the waiver was sought because the people involved thought nothing was being kept from the public because of the late filing. Others thought a report wasn’t needed if there was no activity.
Fully Granted: 25
Partially granted: 19
Denied: 11
Total: 55
Medical/family issues: The entity at issue was unable to file the document because of a medical or family issue.
Fully Granted: 31
Partially granted: 5
Denied: 3
Total: 39
Mail: The late filing occurred because of a mail issue.
Fully Granted: 16
Partially granted: 9
Denied: 9
Total: 34
Someone else’s responsibility: Someone else’s failure resulted in the late filing and the assessed individual should not be penalized as a result.
Fully granted: 13
Partially granted: 4
Denied: 6
Total: 23
Technology: The filer argued they would have been able to adequately file timely were it not for technical glitches.
Fully granted: 13
Partially granted: 6
Denied: 3
Total: 22
Takes responsibility: When the assessed entity takes responsibility for the error occurring.
Fully granted: 8
Partially granted: 8
Denied: 4
Total: 20
First time filer/Lack of knowledge: An individual asserts that they simply were not fully aware of the filing requirement.
Fully granted: 7
Partially granted: 7
Denied: 4
Total: 18
COVID-19: Some issue related to the pandemic impacted their ability to file on time, whether medical, family, mail or lack of staff in the person’s office filing the report.
Fully granted: 9
Partially granted: 3
Denied: 3
Total: 15
Transition of officers: The entity being assessed was undergoing an officer transition that prevented reports from being filed on time. This can include a succeeding treasurer who cannot obtain the proper documents from the outgoing treasurer or difficulty with a bank.
Fully granted: 4
Partially granted: 6
Denied: 4
Total: 14
Good history: A person has been filing for quite some time with no previous penalty.
Fully granted: 7
Partially granted: 7
Denied: 0
Total: 14
Inability to pay: The assessed individual contends that payment of the penalty would be a substantial financial burden.
Fully granted: 8
Partially granted: 5
Denied: 0
Total: 13
Failed to update contact information: The assessed entity failed to have updated contact information on file. The granted waivers in this category also claim other issues such as medical/family or good history.
Fully granted: 6
Partially granted: 3
Denied: 4
Total: 13
Travel: Person in question was traveling, which prevented timely filing.
Fully granted: 4
Partially granted: 3
Denied: 4
Total: 11
Bank issue: Timely filing was not possible due to an ongoing issue with the person’s bank.
Fully granted: 4
Partially granted: 2
Denied: 4
Total: 10
Lost primary: The person in question lost their primary and – despite being instructed otherwise – thought they did not need to file the next report.
Fully granted: 4
Partially granted: 2
Denied: 4
Total: 10
Left employment: This mostly involves lobbyists. The fined lobbyist left their job. They sometimes includes circumstances where they did not leave willingly or did not have access to ethics commission communications due to the transition.
Fully granted: 5
Partially granted: 4
Denied: 1
Total: 10
All personal funds: Similar to inactivity, sometimes candidates contend that their activity was all self-funded.
Fully granted: 4
Partially granted: 4
Denied: 0
Total: 8
Unpaid position: Sometimes people claim that they should receive a waiver because they were serving as treasurer without compensation.
Fully granted: 2
Partially granted: 2
Denied: 2
Total: 6
Corrective action taken: The assessed entity contends that a system is in place to prevent recurrent penalties.
Fully granted: 3
Partially granted: 2
Denied: 1
Total: 6
