Bronson Campaign Flouted Campaign Finance Laws, Blinding The Public
The APOC Staff Report in Dunbar for Mayor v. Bronson for Mayor (BFM) tells a story. That story is either that then-candidate David Bronson unknowingly enlisted quite possibly the worst campaign treasurer of all time or that his mayoral campaign flouted campaign finance regulations for the sake of winning an election no matter the cost.
The dive into APOC's staff report begins where it ends, with a statement from APOC's report:
"Finally, after wading through BFM’s utterly confusing reports for many days, it is clear to staff that the public had no idea of what was going on in the BFM campaign until well after the April 6, 2021 election and the May 11, 2021 runoff election."
APOC's statement is telling. APOC is, after all, the expert in campaign finance. When APOC wrote that their own staff was "wading" through Bronson's "utterly confusing" reports for "many days," they meant it—which makes their next sentence even more ominous, that if APOC's own staff faced challenges trying to figure out BFM's mess the public sure as hell had "no idea" what was going on.
The takeaway from APOC's statement here can't be understated—that BFM effectively blinded the public—who was unable to ascertain how the Bronson campaign was conducting itself during the course of the campaign.
Wasn't that the Bronson campaign's plan?
The total maximum civil penalty recommended by APOC, in this case, is $52,650—which, yes, given the nature of the report's findings, doesn't sound like a lot—but it's nearly 3 times the penalty APOC assessed against former Rep. Pruitt.
In the Pruitt matter, APOC's commissioners increased the recommended civil penalty in their final report—and could likewise make a similar adjustment in the Bronson matter when APOC issues its final report on the Dunbar campaign's complaint.
In its April complaint, the Dunbar for Mayor campaign asserted BFM had engaged in "alleged acts of sloppy and inaccurate accounting, deliberate obfuscation of campaign activity, and potentially tens of thousands of dollars in illegal campaign contributions."
Clearly, and as Dunbar's campaign argued in April, their request for "expedited consideration" of its complaint should have been granted by APOC, and perhaps APOC now regrets its decision not to have done so.
In its Staff Report, APOC wrote that it was "important to note" that in denying the Dunbar campaign's expedited consideration request, the Commission had:
"relied on the representation of counsel for Bronson for Mayor that any violations would be expeditiously corrected with amendments to campaign disclosure reports and return of any prohibited contributions."
Attorney Stacey Stone was the Bronson for Mayor's Counsel who downplayed what she referred to in April’s expedited consideration hearing as “small mistakes,” telling APOC Commissioners that BFM was undertaking an audit and would submit amended reports soon.
Soon never came. APOC's Staff Report states:
"As the investigation revealed, it was not until BFM’s May 11, 2021, amendments to its year-start, 30-day and 7-day reports that the reports came even close to compliant."
Dunbar campaign treasurer Paula DeLaiarro told me via email when reached for comment about the May 11, 2021, amendments made by the Bronson campaign:
"Given that those amendments were filed on the day of the Runoff Election—after the polls closed, no less—indicate that the Bronson campaign never intended to fully and accurately disclose its activity in a timely manner.
It is now clear that the Commissioners were hoodwinked by Bronson's counsel, Stacey Stone, of Holmes Weddle & Barcott. With no incentive to clean up its reports, the Bronson campaign elected to run out the clock before disclosing substantial debt and other financial activity until after the election. Having worked on over 40 campaigns, I have never personally encountered a campaign that exhibited such flagrant bad faith behavior."
Paula DeLairro, Forrest Dunbar for Mayor Campaign Treasurer
The sheer number of amendments made by BFM likely did indeed lead to the obfuscation of Bronson's campaign activity.
Bronson's campaign reports were amended a mind-boggling 13 times total. Four times on their Year Start Report and 3 times each on their 30-day, 7-day, and 7-day runoff reports.
APOC's investigation revealed that none of BFM’s original reports provided the "full and complete information required by APOC statutes and regulations."
By the way, APOC isn't exactly finished because they haven't resolved the matter of that pesky WPA Intel poll yet.
The WPA Intel poll was arguably the most serious of the alleged violations outlined in the Dunbar campaign’s APOC complaint. The Dunbar campaign alleged back in April that BFM received polling data from another person or persons and did not report the receipt as a contribution on its reports.
APOC's Staff Report notes that according to BFM’s own reports, the Bronson campaign made "no expenditure, incurred no debt, or received any nonmonetary contribution that would be consistent with receipt of the February 25, 2021, WPAI polling data in its March 31, 2021 post."
When APOC reached out to Recall Rivera Chair Russell Biggs for information, they were told in essence to 'take a hike,' refusing to provide APOC with the WPA Intel polling information.
Recall Rivera Chair Russell Biggs wrote to APOC in an email, that the sample survey and data of the polling survey are the intellectual property of WPA Intel—telling APOC that it would require a “valid subpoena” to obtain the information from him; otherwise, it would place him at personal substantial risk of civil damages for improper disclosure of WPA Intel’s confidential privileged information and polling techniques.
According to the email chain, Bigg’s opposition appears to involve a WPA Intel email confidentiality notice.
APOC dismissed the WPA Intel polling allegation "without prejudice" so that APOC "may continue its investigation and file its own complaint if the facts warrant it,” according to the recommendation made in the Staff Report.
Worth noting is that APOC does have subpoena power.
APOC's investigation also concluded that the Bronson campaign did not report a debt to Axiom Strategies, a Republican political consulting firm known to have a close connection with WPA Intel.
APOC's Staff Report is chock full of exceptional one-liners and observations. For example, in a section of the report related to May 11, 2021 amendments of BFM's 7-day report, APOC calls an $80,000 debt "less realistic."
In the Mitigation and Recommendation Section of the Staff Report, APOC took aim at BFM's reporting—noting that its debt to Axiom Strategies wasn't reported on its 30-day report "where it belonged" until after the polls closed on May 11—the day of the Anchorage mayoral runoff.
"BFM never reported its February 4, 2020 debt to Axiom until May 5, 2021, when it filed its 7-day runoff report, nor did they report it on its 30-day report, where it belonged, until May 11, 2021 – on the day of the runoff election and a month after the original election on April 6, 2021."
APOC continues throughout its Staff Report giving clues about the Bronson campaign's conduct writing:
"Also telling..."
"Also telling is that BFM never gave a realistic estimate of its original debt to Axiom. It has fluctuated from $20,000 with a balance of $20,000 to $80,000 with a balance of $15,815 and finally to $60,with a balance of$40,000 per a February 4, 2020, Letter of Agreement..."
"Curious" indeed...
In this report filed on May 5, 2021, BFM shows the Axiom debt to be $60,000 with a balance of $40,000. Curiously, this report and the June 3, 2021, amendment to it, report the WPAI poll survey as $1,000 with a balance of $1,000 debt incurred on March 30, 2021; and the WPAI Bronson runoff count memo as $2,000 with a balance of $2,000 incurred on April 30, 2021.
"Failed..."
In seven instances this report failed to Name AT Publishing as Axiom’s subcontractor for mail outs. This was not corrected until BFM amended the report on June 3, 2021.
On Twitter, Anchorage Assemblyman Forrest Dunbar who ran against Bronson pulled no punches in his assessment of both Anchorage Mayor David Bronson and his campaign, writing that Bronson had lied about the Municipal response to Covid-19 and that Bronson's campaign violated health measures during the pandemic.
Of the recommended penalty assessed by APOC against Bronson's campaign, Dunbar wrote that the $50,000+ fine was large and reflective of Bronson's serious violations, but was a small price to pay for his donors.
