The city’s Ethics Review Commission has issued a letter of notification to City Council Member Paige Ellis, documenting a handful of campaign contributions that exceeded campaign finance rules and were not returned to donors in a timely fashion.
Last week the commission held its initial hearing on a complaint brought by Doug Keenan, a resident of District 8, charging that Ellis’ 2022 reelection campaign committed 56 violations: 19 instances of taking amounts above city limits, and 37 instances of incomplete donor employment information on campaign finance reports.
“This represents grounds for numerous and flagrant violations of the law and allowed Council Member Ellis to run a campaign with an unfair and unlawful advantage over opponents,” Keenan said in his opening statement, in which he pushed the commission to ask the city attorney to pursue misdemeanor charges over the alleged violations.
“It is quite surprising and alarming that a twice-elected official representing us in District 8 has allowed these 56 counts of violation to exist, showing such disregard for the law.”
Ellis and her husband, political consultant and campaign manager Ed Espinoza, responded that the improper tracking of many of the excessive donations – limits on which were increased during the campaign season – were due to insufficient donor tracking software, with some of the donations being in excess solely because of small transaction processing charges. In seven instances, they said, the excess donations were returned within the same reporting period in which they were received, and those handful would be shown as returned and in compliance when the final 2022 election report is made public in mid-January.
“Through our own research we have determined that only seven fit this criteria, the majority of which are individuals who paid nominal processing fees ranging from $2.95 to $5.08,” Espinoza said. “In all seven of those instances refunds have been issued and those transactions will be reflected on the next regularly scheduled campaign finance report.”
Commissioners agreed fairly quickly that there was reasonable evidence to believe a small number of violations had occurred relating to the excessive amounts, but found no merit in Keenan’s claim of insufficient donor employment information. That unanimous vote could have led to another hearing in January, but Ellis’ acknowledgment of some violations allowed the commissioners to decide last week on how to sanction her, with the letter of notification being the least severe of the available options.
Commissioner Michael Lovins unsuccessfully argued for a more serious letter of admonition for Ellis because a pair of donations from a married couple occurred both before and after the increase in donation limits.
James Cousar, the commission’s outside counsel on campaign finance law, said the letter of admonition would require the commission to decide whether Ellis and her campaign knowingly allowed the violations to happen and only moved to correct them after receiving Keenan’s complaint on Nov. 9, the day after Ellis was reelected.
Commissioner Betsy Greenberg said the records produced by Ellis and Espinoza for the campaign’s 631 donors and more than $120,000 in campaign funds suggested the violations were likely bookkeeping errors that were refunded in a reasonable time frame.
“Frankly, if we went with a fine-toothed comb over every campaign finance report we’d find these kinds of situations in every single one. Nobody comes to the ethics commission because they love the person … they come because of political motivations,” she said. “That’s irrelevant since our job is to decide, are there reasonable grounds to believe that a violation has occurred when a complaint is filed … and in this case there are.”
The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here. This story has been changed since publication to correct a set of transposed numbers and a statement that all but seven of the donations in question had been returned. In fact, seven of the donations were returned as the others were determined to be valid.
And we’re honored you look to us for serious, in-depth news. You know a strong community needs local and dedicated watchdog reporting. We’re here for you and that won’t change. Now will you take the powerful next step and support our nonprofit news organization?
City of Austin Ethics Review Commission: The Ethics Review Commission is charged with review of, among other issues, ethics complaints leveled against City of Austin boards and commission members. They meet quarterly.
