AUGUSTA – An ongoing probe into possible misuse of public money spent on political campaigns could result in fines, even jail time for those involved.
Two legislative candidates in 2004 failed to fully account for nearly $40,000 of taxpayers’ money, according to state documents.
The lawyer advising the state agency investigating the campaigns said two areas of state law that could apply in these cases allow for civil and criminal penalties.
“There’s the possibility” of both, said Assistant Attorney General Phyllis Gardner.
If candidates or campaign workers filed reports that misrepresented the truth or made false statements about a campaign, they could be fined up to $5,000 for each offense, according to Maine general campaign finance laws.
If they knowingly did those things, they could be charged with a Class E crime, punishable by up to a year in prison.
In addition, candidates who use public money to pay for their campaigns are subject to laws under the Maine Clean Election Act.
That could add up to $10,000 for each civil violation and criminal charges for intentional violations.
The Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices met in October to hear from the two candidates: Julia St. James of Hartford and Sarah Trundy of Minot, and their treasurer, Jessica Larlee, also of Minot. A second hearing is planned for Wednesday.
Daniel Rogers of Auburn, who reportedly recruited the two candidates and was paid to work on their campaigns, is scheduled to testify at that hearing. One member of the state panel said he is eager to quiz Rogers about the role he played in those and other campaigns.
“There’s nothing illegal in and of itself in this but we do look for things that jump off the page,” said Andrew Ketterer, a former state attorney general.
Political parties recruit candidates to run all the time, he said, but it is unusual for a political consultant to do that.
“Why would that be, and who was he recruiting? And the candidates didn’t appear to be particularly strong. … He was sort of almost looking for maybe weak candidates who would rely on his ability as a political consultant,” Ketterer said in a telephone interview Thursday.
It doesn’t matter what Rogers’ motivation was, as long as he provided their campaigns with the full value of the services for which he charged, Ketterer said. “You have to provide something significant for that money, otherwise it’s just a sham.”
He said it was “very, very out of the ordinary” for a team of political consultant and treasurer, as was the case with Rogers and Larlee, to assume those roles in a campaign.
“Then there’s no safeguard on how the funds get spent,” Ketterer said.
Some officials have suggested that the Maine Clean Elections Act could be vulnerable to unscrupulous political operatives who might enlist people to run as Clean Election candidates in an effort to tap into millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money.
It will be up to the commission’s four members to refer to the Attorney General’s Office allegations of criminal violations, Gardner said. She provides legal advice to the ethics panel and also questions witnesses during the hearings.
Criminal charges appear less likely to result from the hearings.
“The general rule is the criminal law gets applied very infrequently,” Ketterer said. “The quality of the proof has to be beyond a reasonable doubt.”
No decisions whether to cite anyone for any violations would be made until after the commission has completed its review, Gardner said.
“We’re going to have to hear from all the witnesses and gather all the evidence through the investigative hearing and analyze it and see what it suggests,” Gardner said.
Comments are no longer available on this story