Nearly all the money the committee to recall House Education
Committee Chair Paul Scott (R-Grand Blanc) has reported expending so far was
spent in the East Lansing area — not in Scott's district.
The recall committee, known as Citizens Against Government
Overreach (CAGO), billed itself as a grassroots effort within Scott's 51st House District. However, according to a campaign report filed this week, CAGO
spent less than 1 percent of its expenditures in the 51st.
Of the $13,504 CAGO has reported spending so far, it paid
out just $104.46 in Scott's district. This $104.46 was spent at a Grand Blanc
Staples store.
CAGO turned in its first campaign finance report to the
State Bureau of Elections this week nearly two months after it was due. State
officials allowed the late filing after determining that the wording of the
regulations involved hadn't been clearly written. According to the report, CAGO
was funded entirely through a $25,000 donation from the Michigan Education
Association (MEA), with the exception of one $100 donation, apparently from an
individual.
The MEA's $25,000 donation to CAGO was reported on its financial
report in late July. It had been well-publicized even before the signatures were
turned in. However, until this week it was not clear that the MEA donation
comprised virtually all of the campaign contributions CAGO had received.
As suspected, the bulk of CAGO's spending went to East
Lansing-based Practical Political
Consulting (PPC). PPC President Mark Grebner is the state's leading political
list compiler and a highly regarded legislative recall campaign expert.
According to the campaign report, Grebner's company received
$10,000 for its role in the recall campaign. However, the company could have received
additional dollars that would show up on a future expenditure filing.
Grebner told Capitol Confidential this week that he
never actually went to Scott's district in connection with the recall effort.
“I never even went over to Flint,” Grebner said. “I stayed
in my office in East Lansing and took some phone calls and stratigized. As I've
said previously, I have some very good people working for me.”
In addition, Grebner said his personal interactions
involving the recall effort were with the MEA, not CAGO.
CAGO turned in 12,133 signatures (previous news accounts
rounded it up to 12,200), 2,187 more than the 9,446 required. It's now clear
that enough of the signatures were valid to put Scott's name on the Nov. 8
ballot for a recall election. In a preliminary review of the signatures,
Election Bureau officials found only 1,086 signatures they ruled to be invalid.
Perhaps more significantly, recall opponents have stopped their review of the
signatures.
It's widely believed that one of Grebner's responsibilities in
the petition drive was to “scrub” the signatures before they were handed over
to the state. This means making sure most of the questionable signatures were
removed ahead of time.
Scott has filed an appeal, based on the premise that the
petition drive started collecting signatures before all issues of clarity had
been addressed. That appeal was moved up to the Michigan Supreme Court on
Thursday, but those in the Scott camp are proceeding on the assumption that
there will be a recall election.
The financial statement CAGO turned in this week might have
only covered its activities prior to the signature collection period. In spite
of the fact that the petition drive ended three weeks ago, CAGO's contributions
and expenditures that took place after the mid-summer filing period aren't
required to be on the statement filed this week. The filing that would cover
the period when the recall petition drive was actually taking place isn't due
until Oct. 25 — just two weeks before the election.
It's been widely reported that petition circulators for the
recall effort were paid from $3 to $4 per signature. What's more, Grebner has
said that a recall campaign such as the one in the 51st House
District could only succeed with paid circulators. If the circulators were paid
a per-signature rate, the CAGO report filed this week would not include those
costs. If Grebner's company received any additional payments for its work on
the recall effort; that would also be reflected in a future financial report,
not in the one turned in this week.
Capitol Confidential asked Bureau of Elections
Spokesman Fred Woodhams if expenditures
paid for signature gathering would show up on CAGO's next financial report.
“Its possible,” Woodhams said. “Those expenditures might not
have been made during the reporting period. It's also possible that some other
committee was involved with the recall effort.”
Leon Drolet, director of the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance and a veteran of many petition drives, said that at this time it could be
difficult to get information about the money that was paid out for the
signatures but those payments should eventually become public.
“At this point, we don't even know what arrangements were
made for paying them,” Drolet said. “They may not have even been paid yet. A
few years ago, Clean Water Action (a so-called environmental group) tried to
claim their circulators were just dispensing information. They argued that
their circulators' jobs were to tell people about clean water but then, as private
citizens, they'd just happen to have a petition on hand to be signed.”
“I think asking about the expenditures for the signatures is
a good question,” Drolet added. “That is something to watch for. There are a
lot of ways of doing these things. But even if some other group paid for the
signatures, it should eventually show up somewhere as an in-kind contribution.”
After Grebner, CAGO's next highest payout, according to its
expenditure report, went to Vaughn Thompson, who received $2,904.46. Thompson
is listed on the report as being from Haslett, which is located near East
Lansing. News media accounts have described Thompson as a consultant. However,
as recently as 2010, Thompson was the political director for the Service Employees
International Union (SEIU).
According to CAGO's filing, the recall committee still had
$11,596 on hand at the end of the period covered in its statement.