Delegate Onzlee Ware
Delegate Onzlee Ware who won with 68% of the vote in the June 9 Democratic primary against challenger Martin Jeffrey still faces a State Board of Elections inquiry. David Allen, Campaign Finance Manager with the SBE has composed a letter to Ware dated June 10.
According to Allen in an email by Code (§ 24.2-953.3) Ware “will have 10 days to amend his reports before assessing any civil penalties. Once he complies with my request I will make a determination as to whether I consider it closed, need to request additional documentation, assess civil penalties or take the matter before the Board.”
Allen said that the next Board meeting is too soon to get a response and have it placed on the Board’s June 23rd agenda. It would have to wait until a July Board meeting.
The entire letter to Ware from Allen CAN BE READ BY CLICKING HERE.
The attachment to the letter CAN BE ACCESSED BY CLICKING HERE.
Basically the letter outlines the four basic issues the SBE has with Ware’s filing “at this time.”
- The use of the term “Reimbursement” as the sole description of goods or services,
Round numbers seem suspicious, and
Payee listed as “cash”
Reimbursement Descriptions: Review of your past filings discloses expenditures that were listed as “Reimbursement” paid to you and authorized by you. While § 24.2-947.2 of the Code of Virginia allows reimbursement, our published guidance makes clear that an adequate description must be included in order that a report may be considered complete: “In no case should the treasurer enter simply “reimbursement” in the item or service column. The report must be as descriptive as possible.” See http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/Campaign_Finance/Cidate_Summary_-_03-09-2009.pdf (Page 34).
Please provide a description for each of the expenditures listed as “Reimbursement.”
Aggregate Reimbursements: Reimbursements for multiple expenditures may be aggregated where the description covers expenditures of the same nature by the same person. Alternatively, you may list the entity that was paid initially on the date in which the original expenditure was made. This is similar to how credit card expenditures are reported. See http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/Campaign_Finance/Cidate_Summary_-_03-09-2009.pdf (Page34). If the descriptions requested above do not cover all of the expenditures which are currently aggregated on your report, please list each expenditure and description separately.
Expenditure Amounts: Expenditure amounts must be accurate and not rounded… While it may be feasible for the aggregate of several transactions or one single transaction to total a round amount such as $350 or $500, it is not very probable. Please provide receipts for the expenditures in the attached table. If the amount of the expenditures is not accurate, please amend your reports.
Payee Names: Finally, there is an expenditure listing the payee as “Cash”, authorized by you, with the description “Polls.” Expenditures must list, “…The name and address of the person paid…” (§24.2-947.4. (C)).
Based on the foregoing, the State Board staff requests that you provide no later than June 22, 2009, amended reports with supporting receipts and documentation for:
- all expenditures described as “Reimbursement;”
- the expenditure in which the payee is listed as “Cash;” and
- the description listed as “Polls.”
The reports and documentation will be reviewed and a determination will be made to request further information, assess civil penalties or refer the matter to the State Board of Elections.
Should staff refer the matter to the Board, they will present the complaint to the Board along with your response and their recommendation. You will be notified prior to the meeting that will include this matter on the agenda.
As required by § 24.2-953.3(B), the State Board of Elections is providing you the opportunity to respond prior to assessing civil penalties.
Posted By Valerie Garner
Categories: Election 2009, Finance, Politics
Tags: democrat, election2009, investigation, Onzlee_Ware