Complaints lodged against Dann

By David Skolnick

A second complaint involving tens of thousands of additional dollars was reported late Thursday.

YOUNGSTOWN — The Ohio Secretary of State has filed a complaint against ex-Attorney General Marc Dann, his deputy campaign treasurer and former campaign treasurer, accusing them of violating state campaign finance law.

The campaign is accused of improperly spending $40,610.28 on a security system at Dann’s Liberty Township house as well as paying at least $4,368.63 for cell phones that Dann, his wife and children used for calls not related to the campaign.

The complaint was filed Thursday, along with a separate complaint contending that Dann falsified campaign finance records to disguise tens of thousands of dollars spent to benefit himself, his wife, children and top campaign staffers, according to the Columbus Dispatch.

In a story posted on its Web site Thursday evening, the Dispatch reported that Inspector General Thomas P. Charles filed a sworn statement with the Ohio Elections Commission stating that statements of receipts and expenditures Dann’s campaign filed with the secretary of state “contain incomplete, inaccurate and false information concerning expenditures ... for travel, food, beverages, cell phones and other expenditures.”

Several of the allegations in Charles’ report of more than 1,000 pages were new, the Dispatch wrote.

The other complaint, filed by the secretary of state, was also referred to the Ohio Elections Commission for further investigation. Donald J. McTigue, Dann’s attorney, said he’s “confident that the two sets of expenditures in [that] complaint were entirely proper and lawful and that the elections commission will agree.”

Named in that complaint are Dann; Bruce Lev of Hubbard, his former campaign treasurer; and Mary Beth Snyder of Liberty, the committee’s current deputy treasurer. Dann is his campaign’s current treasurer.

When the secretary of state’s office first investigated Dann’s campaign finances in May, it questioned dozens of expenditures.

Dann’s campaign explained them all, McTigue said. But the secretary of state’s office wasn’t satisfied with the answers related to the security system and the cell phones.

McTigue, former staff counsel for the commission and a prominent Ohio elections law attorney, said that under a worst-case scenario, the commission would require Dann to reimburse the money and pay a fine.

“But a fine is very unlikely,” he said.

The commission has the ability to refer election violations to a county prosecutor. McTigue said that’s in cases involving issues such as campaign money laundering and not a “disagreement” such as this one between Dann’s campaign and the secretary of state’s office.

Dann offered to pay the “current fair market value” of the security system to settle that issue over a month ago, McTigue said. But that was rejected because he should pay the entire cost of the system, $40,610.28, said Jeff Ortega, a secretary of state spokesman.

“The expense should have never happened,” Ortega said. “The full amount should be paid.”

Neither side mentioned the monetary difference between the full cost and the current fair market value of the system.

The system was installed while Dann was attorney general because of threats made against him and his family in connection with that job, McTigue said.

In response, J. Curtis Mayhew, the secretary of state’s campaign finance administrator, wrote in the complaint to the commission that “the personal benefit to the candidate from these capital improvements to his personal residence outweigh any factors demonstrating the expenditures were made either to influence the result of an election or to a qualified charity” as required under state law.

As for the cell phone issue, Mayhew wrote that a “campaign committee may directly pay a vendor only if the expense is for a service or good used exclusively for the purposes permitted” under state law.

McTigue said he thought the cell phone issue was resolved.

“It is common and lawful for candidates and officeholders to use campaign funds for such charges related to political activities and the duties of public office,” he said. “Hundreds of candidates and officeholders do so.”

The disagreement, he said, is how to allocate payment by the committee for the campaign portion of the phone versus the personal use portion.

Dann, a Liberty Democrat, resigned May 14 as attorney general under pressure from state Democratic and Republican leaders.

A May 2 internal AG report described the office under Dann’s watch as one filled with cronyism and unprofessional behavior. The report determined that a department head, who was a longtime friend of Dann, had sexually harassed two women.

After the report was issued, Dann admitted to an affair with his former scheduler and said that he was unprepared to run the office.

skolnick@vindy.com