The Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission will investigate whether Arizona Corporation Commission candidate Ralph Heap violated a campaign finance statute or rule.
The commission voted in its Friday meeting for the investigation on the basis of a “reason to believe” that Heap was in violation of some rule or statute for not disclosing signs for which he had not yet paid because he had not yet been charged for them. The commission voted 4-0 to investigate.
However, the commission voted 3-1 to release the funding in apparent agreement with the take from Heap’s lawyer, Tim La Sota, who said the commission could release the funds and investigate any allegations against Heap simultaneously.
“If you fail in your legal duty to provide the money to Dr. Heap then yes, you do need to release him from the program,” said LaSota. “[Y]ou’re attempting to sway an election by refusing to allow somebody who hasn’t taken a dime of your money to withdraw from this Clean Elections [program].”
Without those funds, Heap was unable to campaign because Clean Elections rules prohibit him from raising private funds. The commission refused to release him from the program, and Heap was made to wait for weeks as the commission decided what it should do about signs for which the merchant had not yet charged a candidate.
Commissioner Sam Crump was the sole “no” vote on releasing the funds to Heap.
Executive Director Thomas Collins had recommended at the outset of the meeting prior to La Sota’s remarks that the commission withhold Clean Elections funds based on “sufficient” evidence of illegal activity.
Part of the commission’s problem with Heap was his initial delay on signing a sworn affidavit vouching for his campaign finance reports as required by state law to receive Clean Elections funding. Heap signed it earlier this week.
The commission’s main and present issue with Heap concerns an alleged failure to disclose the funding behind his campaign signs displayed throughout the primary election.
Those signs were reportedly produced with the understanding that they would be paid for at a later date. The main contention between members of the commission and La Sota is whether or not those lines of credit must be disclosed prior to official payment of services rendered.
Jim Torgeson, a Gilbert City Council member whose term ends in January 2027, submitted a sworn affidavit that the signs were purchased from him through a line of credit at his business, Mesa Sign Shop.
La Sota later told Axios that Heap would disclose spending on the signs only after he pays for them.
Collins claimed during the meeting that there was reason to believe that the line of credit was unlawful to take.
La Sota argued that the committee had an obligation to release funding to Heap because he’d met other Clean Elections requirements for signatures and $5 contributions, and that if the committee refused to do so on the basis of “evidence of illegal activity” then it would appear to be acting on political motives.
“This rule essentially allows the commission to simply withhold money on any evidence of any illegal activity, which is a way of saying if the commission just has a politically disfavored candidate it doesn’t want to fund, it doesn’t have to fund him,” said La Sota. “We deserve our money right now, Mr. Chairman.”
La Sota said the commission’s refusal to allow Heap to withdraw from the Clean Elections program violated Heap’s constitutional rights to free speech because it hindered his ability to fundraise for his campaign.
Be the first to comment