By
Benny Polacca
The Osage Nation Election Board reduced a $500 fine assessed to 2016 Congressional candidate Fi Davis after he filed an appeal regarding his second campaign reporting statement turned in after the deadline.
The board heard the appeal on July 12 requested by Davis and voted to reduce the fine to $250 after determining Davis meant to follow the election rules and a misunderstanding of the listed deadlines resulted in the late reporting statement submission. Davis filed his appeal to the Election Board on July 5.
Davis stated he complied with the rules and noted his daughter faxed his second campaign reporting statement to the Election Office on June 24, which is defined on the Important Dates sheet handed to all 15 candidates as “2nd Campaign Reporting Statement Failure to File Deadline.”
Election Supervisor Alexis Rencountre said she sent an email reminding the candidates of the June 21 deadline (Tuesday) to submit the campaign reporting statements two business days in advance (Friday June 17).
Election Board Chairwoman Shannon Lockett, who attended via telephone, referenced the Important Dates sheet and said June 21 is listed as “2nd Campaign Reporting Statement due.” She then clarified the difference between the two listed deadlines.
“That June 24 deadline only comes into effect if you have failed to file by the original deadline. The reason that second deadline exists is so we can have some type of stopping place in this process for people who want to run for office again or (who) are actually elected for office this time … it’s a drop-dead date, if you will, to comply with our law,” Lockett said. Those candidates who do not follow the 24th deadline for correcting deficiencies in their reporting statements or do not submit them cannot take office (if elected) or face prohibition from running for office in future elections until those issues are remedied, she said.
The Election Office also noted the second campaign reporting statement submitted by Davis did not have any deficiencies even though it was submitted late.
ON Assistant Attorney General Clint Patterson said the second deadline does not apply unless the candidate has deficiencies and said the wording does create confusion on the June 24 deadline.
Davis attended a candidate workshop hosted by the Election Board in April and recalled the board discussing the Important Dates. “We sent my final statement on the 24th according to this Important Dates to remember that I was given at training and it was emphasized that I needed to comply with these dates. This sheet of paper says it is due – it didn’t say it’s a deadline – but it does say the 24th is a deadline and that’s what I was complying with.”
Election Board member Terry Hazen said she understood what Davis was saying, but also noted Rencountre’s email reminder also stated the candidates needed to submit their reporting statements by the 21st to avoid the $500 fine.
Election Board member Belle Wilson asked for the history regarding prior election years regarding the campaign reporting statements. Lockett said the election rules were amended to address prior incidents when candidates submitted the statements late or did not correct deficiencies.
Lockett said the original fine for not submitting a campaign reporting statement was $50 but that amount changed, adding “we don’t like to fine people we hate it … With $50 (fine in place), we had multiple candidates missing this deadline, so the next (election) cycle, we raised it to $500 and that has helped tremendously,” she said.
Davis said he understood the board’s discussion and “I want you to know I’m not trying to get by with anything … I want to comply with your rules and regulations – I run the Food Distribution Program and I have to work with rules and regulations … I was confused as to that deadline and the ‘due,’ I understand that now.” Davis said he’s not against paying a fine, but did not think the $500 fine was warranted.
Patterson said the $500 fine is “set in stone,” but the rules and regulations appeals section states the board can reconsider any decision based on the appeal, information presented and “the totality of the circumstances to adjust the fine as the board sees fit.”
Hazen and Wilson suggested cutting the $500 fine in half to $250 after the discussion. Lockett agreed the reduction is “a fair compromise” considering Davis complied with the other deadlines and election rules and regulations. Afterward, the board voted unanimously to reduce the fine to $250 and Davis thanked the board for the opportunity to hear from him.
Afterward, the board also certified the six campaign reporting statements that were found to have deficiencies at the June 30 meeting. Those candidates submitted the corrected information to be compliant, Rencountre said. The deficiencies included missing information including bank documents, math errors and illegible handwriting that made reports difficult to read.
Original Publish Date: 2016-07-15 00:00:00
