Donnelly threatens to sue Ethics Commission over secret hearings
State Rep. Margaret Donnelly, D-Richmond Heights and a candidate for Missouri attorney general, has made clear her frustration with the Missouri Ethics Commission.
In a release Monday, Donnelly wrote that she has sent the panel a letter asking it “to reconsider its plans to hold closed ‘hardship hearings’ or face legal action over violation of the state’s Sunshine Law.”
“The people of Missouri are fed up with government behind closed doors,” she said in a statement. “If the Missouri Ethics Commission goes forward with its plans for closed hardship hearings, I will file suit and ask the courts to force them into compliance.”
“The Commission is straining to find a valid reason for closed hearings. Missouri law requires commission investigations of campaign violation complaints to be closed to the public until a finding has been made. But under ‘hardship hearings,’ there are no complainants and there are no investigations of campaign violations,” Donnelly’s release said.
“The only issue is whether any candidate should be exempt from having to return the over-the-limit contributions because of a perceived hardship to their campaign.
“The campaign finance laws are designed to promote transparency and prevent secrecy. Candidates should be required to justify their actions in an open forum.”
The commission had sent letters to all 161 candidates who’ve collected overlimit donations, and told them they must respond by Monday if they have returned or are planning to
return over-the-limit contributions. The commission won’t even confirm its deadlines; Political Fix obtained a copy of one of the panel’s letters from an affected candidate.
As Donnelly’s release notes: “Candidates wanting to keep over-the-limit contributions must respond by December 3. Donnelly returned over-the-limit contributions last quarter and has met the deadline for responding to the commission.
“As Attorney General, I will always try to save the taxpayers money, by not rushing to court,” Donnelly wrote. “I am hopeful that litigation will not be necessary and that the Missouri Ethics Commission will open these hearings.”
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
The whole whether or not to give the money back is a crock! What’s the rule, if you spent it already you dont have to give it back, but if you didnt, you do? What kind of rule is that. The court that made the decision is the biggest judicial lack of cahonnes or smarts since Clarence Thomas last committed perjury in his confirmation hearing or tried to think in the absence of Scalia. The ruling should have been prospective only! And with all due respect to the Ethics Commission, and no further references to oevoes (sp), the Ethics Commission ought to bite the bullet the court didnt and say that everyone can keep the money. In retrospect, when such a law is passed, it probably should apply until legal challenges are exhausted, or provisions in the event it’s overturned in court, should be built into the statute. Just a thought or two, but possible trenchant ones.