OLYMPIA — When the five citizens empowered to enforce Washington’s campaign finance laws reviewed allegations against Tim Eyman, they concluded his behavior in 2012 was so egregious they could never punish him as much as they might like or he might deserve.
So they voted to send the case, along with a 224-page investigative report, to Attorney General Bob Ferguson. They urged him to throw the book at the state’s ubiquitous initiative entrepreneur.
In their motion, members of the Public Disclosure Commission asked Ferguson “to take any and all appropriate legal action” including “both possible civil and criminal sanctions.” They also implored the attorney general to look into Eyman’s dealings before and after the filing of the complaint that triggered the commission’s referral.
“His actions and operations appear to have been an intentional (flouting) of campaign finance and disclosure laws, laws which were enacted by the voters to put a stop to conduct such as this,” commissioner Anne Levinson read from her motion that passed unanimously Sept. 24.
But how hard can Ferguson punish the initiative guru from Mukilteo?
It could be pretty hard.
“The attorney general has the power to seek a large financial penalty or even criminal penalties and that power could be used to leverage pretty much anything they want from Eyman,” said Seattle attorney Knoll Lowney, whose past complaints against building and grocery industry groups for violating campaign laws resulted in state action against both.
If the evidence supports the allegations, Ferguson could try to negotiate a settlement consisting of a large fine and restrictions on Eyman’s role in the political committees he commands.
“That type of relief is certainly possible,” said Peter Lavallee, Ferguson’s spokesman.
It is unclear what potential criminal sanctions could apply. Temporarily suspending Eyman from the political process isn’t out of the question. But the attorney general would want to ask a court to take such action, he said.
That would please Eyman’s critics.
“We don’t know how deep this could go,” said Collin Jergens, spokesman for Fuse Washington, a statewide group of progressives which has opposed every Eyman initiative. “I’m not sure how the attorney general would kick him out of politics but we do hope he pursues penalties to the full extent of the law.”
A labyrinth
Eyman is accused of illicitly moving money between two initiative campaigns in 2012 and concealing a $308,000 kickback he got from the signature-gathering firm hired to work on both measures.
The PDC report used emails, bank records and interviews to diagram how Eyman allegedly used donations gathered in support of Initiative 1185 to help boost another of his measures, Initiative 517.
Investigators say they traced how Eyman, through his political committee Voters Want More Choices, steered $1.2 million to the signature-gathering firm, Citizen Solutions, for the anti-tax measure I-1185.
Days after turning in the signatures, Eyman got paid $308,000 from the firm. He reportedly kept a little over $100,000 for himself and loaned the rest to a Virginia organization which used it to help get I-517 on the ballot. That measure sought to make it easier for signature-gatherers to operate in the state.
Eyman didn’t disclose the money he got from Citizen Solutions or the loan, according to the PDC report. Both transactions should have been reported as Eyman knew the money was to be used for campaign-related expenditures, the report said.
In the course of the probe, investigators say they found Citizen Solutions had been paying Eyman during nearly every initiative campaign in the past decade.
Eyman has declined repeated requests for comment on the allegations.
Mark Lamb, the Bothell attorney representing Eyman, declined to be interviewed for this story. He’s previously said that “following a full hearing on the merits my client will prevail. To this day, my client believes all required information was reported.”
Not the first time
It’s pretty rare for the Public Disclosure Commission to punt a case to the attorney general on the grounds that its penalty authority is insufficient.
One of the last times occurred in 2010 and involved a state Senate race in Everett. Moxie Media, a Democratic consulting firm in Seattle, was found to have concealed the source of money behind mailers and phone calls attacking former Democratic state Sen. Jean Berkey in the final days of the August primary.
The company had been working to unseat Berkey and elect a more liberal Democrat, Nick Harper. In the final days of the primary, the firm paid for mailers and phone calls to boost the visibility of the third candidate in the race, conservative Republican Rod Rieger.
It worked. Harper won the primary and Rieger finished ahead of Berkey, ending her political career.
PDC staff reached an agreement with Moxie Media’s principal owner, Lisa MacLean, on a $30,000 fine. But the commission felt the hijinks deserved a greater penalty and sent it to Rob McKenna, then attorney general.
A few months later the two sides settled. The firm was ordered to pay $250,000 in fines and $40,000 in legal fees. The agreement also stipulated Moxie could avoid paying $140,000 of the fine if it does not break any campaign disclosure laws through 2015.
A civil action
That case played out entirely in the civil arena. The Eyman case may, too.
Lavallee said the attorney general can only undertake a criminal prosecution if it receives a request to do so from a county prosecutor or the governor.
Lowney disagreed. Washington’s election laws provide Ferguson a wide array of powers and he encouraged him to use them all.
“I would hope the attorney general recognizes he needs to go for unprecedented penalties and look into criminal prosecution,” he said.
Levinson said if Ferguson requires something more than the commission referral in order to launch a criminal probe, the PDC would support making that happen.
“We want to make sure the remedies match what appears to be a very egregious pattern of behavior,” she said.
Commissioners want Ferguson to unravel the mystery of the payments Citizen Solutions made to Eyman, which he claimed as personal compensation. The PDC report says the payments needed to be disclosed and could not be used for personal expenses.
In 2002, Eyman was found to have concealed payments to himself from campaign funds and was fined $55,000 by the state. He also was permanently enjoined from acting as treasurer of any political committee, or as signer on any financial accounts of such a committee.
If the new allegations are true, this would appear to be a second strike for a similar violation, said Jan Gee, president of the Washington Food Industry Association. The group had supported Eyman measures until I-517, which it opposed.
“I think the guy has to be disallowed from participating for at least some period of time,” she said.
“When lobbyists do improper reporting or no reporting they get stripped of their lobbying privileges for a period of time. The same kind of treatment must be applied to a professional paid to do initiatives.”
Gee and Jergens said ultimately they don’t expect Eyman to be booted from the scene but they do hope he modifies his behavior.
“All we expect of Eyman is for him to play by the rules like everybody else,” Jergens said.
Jerry Cornfield: 360-352-8623; jcornfield@heraldnet.com.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
