Maricopa County 1 - Local Government Association Officer-Campaign Contributions
<b>Update:</b> 9/30/09<br>
I was asked to do a short interview on Phoenix's NPR station KJZZ
yesterday, to provide a government ethics view on issues relating to the latest battle in
the uncivil war among elected officials in Maricopa County, the county
that includes Phoenix. My research into what is going on raised all
sorts of interesting issues. I'll deal with them in multiple blog posts.<br>
<br>
First, what happened. County Sheriff Joe Arpaio arrested County
Supervisor (effectively council member) Don Stapley three days after a
county attorney moved to dismiss charges against Shapley for numerous
purgery counts relating to the filing of financial disclosure forms.
The new counts, according to <a href="http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2009/09/21/…; target="”_blank”"><b>an
article</b></a> in the Arizona Republic, involve primarily (i) campaigning
for officer positions in the National Association of Counties (NACo), a
membership organization, including misuse of office and personal use of
campaign contributions; and (ii) misrepresentations on a mortgage
document, campaign finance reports, and a tax return. The great
majority of the counts are felony counts.<br>
<br>
One issue, which I had never thought of, is not part of the case, but
its facts led me to think of it. According to the counts, one NACo
campaign contribution was in the sum of $25,000, and fifteen others
ranged from $3,000 to $24,999.<br>
<br>
Pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes §16-905, as recently updated,
an individual can give a county candidate only $410 per election cycle.
But when a county candidate runs for an office in a national
association, there appears to be no limit. What a huge, wonderful
loophole to campaign finance laws!<br>
<br>
Of course, if there are good gift provisions in the county ethics law,
such contributions from those doing business with the county would not
be allowed. This is another reason why gift laws are an important complement to
campaign finance laws.<br>
<br>
Of course, according to its <a href="http://www.maricopa.gov/Internal_audit/PubDocuments/Controls/ethicsHand…; target="”_blank”"><b>ethics
handbook</b></a> (page 5), Maricopa County does not appear to have a gift
policy for elected officials, just for employees. State law only
prohibits gifts to board members for services rendered, that is, tips.<br>
<br>
Considering this loophole, state, regional, and national associations of local government officials
should have express limits on contributions given to candidates for its
offices, they should require disclosure, and they should prohibit
contributions from anyone doing business with the local government. If
these associations show leadership in government ethics by instituting
best practices, these best practices may rub off on their members.<br>
<br>
<b>Update:</b> 9/30/09<br>
NACo did pass some campaign rules this year, after the Stapley campaign. But the only relevant rule is as follows: "candidates ... voluntarily agree to limit non-travel-related campaign expenses to no more than $25,000."<br>
<br>
This means that Stapley could have spent far less than the $100,000 or so he is said to have raised, unless he used most of the money to travel around and visit other county officials with a vote. But he still could receive contributions from lobbyists and others doing business with the county far larger than those allowable under state law.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>