Court Filings

PrivacyforAllStudentsFPPCComplaint - PDF

of 12
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
   1 ATTACHMENT TO FRED KARGER’S SWORN COMPLAINT FORM  AGAINST NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MARRIAGE, PRIVACY FOR ALL STUDENTS, ET AL.   Describe, With as Much Particularity as Possible, the Facts Constituting the Alleged Violation(s) and How You Have Personal Knowledge that it Occurred.  (continued from page 2 of Sworn Complaint) As described here and supported by the attached documentation, the National Organization for Marriage (“NOM”), its Political Director Frank Schubert of Mission Public Affairs, LLC, Privacy for All Students (“PFAS” or the “Committee”) , major donor Sean Feiler, and numerous others violated several material provisions of the Political Reform Act and the Fair Political Practices Commission’s (“FPPC”) Regulations  between August 2013 and September 2014. Among the violations that the FPPC staff should investigate and pursue are the following:  NOM’s Sponsorship of “ Privacy for All Students ”  Was Hidden From the Public.  NOM hid its affiliation with and sponsorship of PFAS, even though evidence strongly suggests that NOM was a major supporter, and indeed the “sponsor  , ” of PFAS’s referendum effort in opposition to AB 1266. PFAS’s campaign statements as filed with the Secretary of State, as well as extrinsic evidence, reveal this deception and justify an FPPC investigation and enforcement action. A substantial amount of media coverage makes clear that NOM was the organization b ehind PFAS’s referendum attempt, notwithstanding the fact that PFAS hid this information from the public by failing to mention NOM in its committee name or otherwise. PFAS Failed to File Several Form 460 Campaign Statements as Required by Law. In the 13 months that PFAS has been active, it has filed only one Form 460 campaign finance report (for the period covering July 1, 2013 through September 30, 2013), and has failed to file two additional reports (due January 31, 2014 and July 31, 2014). In addition, PFAS inexplicably filed several Form 497 Late Contribution Reports even though they are not called for under applicable law. PFAS Failed to Properly Account for More Than Half of its Contributions, Thus Depriving the Public of Valuable Information. In addition, despite having raised nearly $500,000 (according to the improperly filed Forms 497), PFAS reported only $142,471.40 on its Form 460, thus failing to  properly account for well over 2/3 of its funds raised. Additionally, because PFAS filed   2 Forms 497 instead of Forms 460 for the last quarter of 2013 and the first part of 2014, it failed to account for hundreds of thousands of dollars that it presumably spent on its referendum effort. Additionally, assuming that PFAS only spent the amount it disclosed on its Form 460, then the amount spent to attempt to qualify the referendum is unreasonably low, given the usual amounts that committees spent when seeking to gather more than 500,000 valid signatures. PFAS’s $168,865.01 in actual reported expenditures pales in comparison to amounts that other committees have spent in connection with the gathering of signatures. As shown below, qualifying a statewide initiative or referendum typically costs upwards of $1.5 million. This discrepancy suggests that some other source paid the lion’s share of the costs  of signature gathering, printing, legal fees, staff, consultants, accounting, etc. via non-monetary contributions, which went undisclosed by PFAS in violation of the law. PFAS Committed Several Other Violations of the Political Reform Act. Among the additional violations that should be investigated and pursued are that PFAS misrepresented itself as a primarily formed candidate or officeholder committee in Section 1 of its Form 460, rather than a primarily formed ballot measure committee. PFAS also failed to disclose its status as a ballot measure committee in Section 6 of its Form 460 and failed to include subtotal information on its Form 460 Schedule A’ s. Although some of PFAS’s violations might appear to be minor, collectively they reflec t either negligence with regard to understanding the Act, or intentional violations of the Act.  Nearly All of PFAS’s Major Donors Violated the Law By Failing to Disclose Their Major Contributions to PFAS.  Not only did PFAS violate the law, but seven of the Committee’s $10,000 or more contributors (major donors) also violated the law by failing to file Major Donor Reports. Five of these major donors, who contributed between $10,000 and $24,999 and failed to file paper copies of their reports with the Secretary of State, are set forth in the chart  below:   3 Contributor Campaign Statement Amount Date Location on Campaign Statement Pacific Justice Institute Form 460 07/01/2013 - 09/30/2013 $10,000 09/23/2013 Page 25, Line 4 Calvary Chapel Chino Hills Form 497  –  10/03/2013 Form 497  –  11/04/2013 $10,000 $10,000 09/26/2013 10/25/2013 Page 32, Line 1 Page 2, Line 1 Thomas Bengard Form 497  –  10/25/2013 $10,000 10/18/2013 Page 20, Line 3 Kenneth & Oberta Eldered Form 497  –  11/04/2013 $10,000 10/25/2013 Page 3, Line 1 Peterson Holding Company Form 497  –  11/10/2013 $10,000 10/31/2013 Page 9, Line 2   4 In addition to the five $10,000 major donor non-filers, the following two $25,000 and above major donors failed to file major donor reports online as required by law, further depriving the public of what should have been easily accessible information. Contributor   Campaign Statement Amount Date Location on Campaign Statement Sean Fieler Form 460 07/01/2013 - 09/30/2013 Form 497 - 10/17/2013 Form 497 - 10/17/2013 $80,000 $70,000 $50,000 09/25/2013 10/07/2013 11/01/2013 Page 27, Line 3 Page 16, Line 1 Page 11, Line 3 Andrew & Rebecca Hagelin Form 497 - 11/04/2013 $25,000 10/24/2013 Page 1, Line 1 It is requested that each of these seven non-filing major donors be investigated and  pursued for their violations. Especially with regard to Sean Fieler, his connections to NOM and the American Principles Project (“APP”) demonstrate his sophistication and  show that he knew or should have known about his Political Reform Act major donor filing obligations. According to an October 7, 2013 article in the Washington Post, in the first half of 2013, Fieler contributed $54,000 to APP (constituting all of APP’s funds) and “has made substantial contributions [believed to be $100,000] to [NOM], a group opposing gay marriage .” (See attached).  Given that Fieler was by far the largest contributor to PFAS (at $200,000) and had previously contributed a six-figure sum to NOM, this represents yet another undeniable connection between PFAS and NOM. PFAS Appears to Have Failed to Provide Its $5,000 Contributors With Required Notification That They May Become Major Donors. In addition to the major donor non-filers, there are numerous contributors to PFAS of $5,000 or more. It is alleged that PFAS failed to provide these contributors with the required notice that they may become major donors and therefore be required to file major donor reports. As to these contributors, who are listed below, PFAS should be further investigated. Also, the $5,000 contributors should be investigated to determine if they in fact reached the $10,000 contribution threshold (in combination with their contributions to PFAS and other state or local candidates or ballot measures) and incurred major donor filing obligations. Herman Rowland, Sr. Form 460 07/01/2013 - 09/30/2013 $5,000 09/26/2013 Page 30 Line 4 Jordan Riggs Form 497  –  10/25/2013 $5,000 10/15/2013 Page 16 Line 1 Larry Brasher Form 497  –  11/01/2013 $5,000 10/22/2013 Page 3 Line 1 Jeffrey Armour Form 497  –  11/01/2013 $5,000 10/23/2013 Page 6 Line 1 Young Lim Form 497  –  11/10/2013 $5,000 11/01/2013 Page 14 Line 1
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks