Sedgwick County Democratic Party didn’t disclose donors or expenses, complaint says

An ethics complaint has been filed against the Sedgwick County Democratic Central Committee claiming the party’s last three campaign finance reports are “a gross misrepresentation of their financial dealings.”

The reports — including a report for the latest election cycle — don’t list the names of donors for tens of thousands of dollars to the committee or where the money went.

The latest report, which became publicly available last week, claims the committee received $21,657.23 from contributors who were either unknown or gave $50 or less and don’t have to be identified under state law.

Also missing from the latest report, which covers all of 2019, is how the party committee spent $27,581.30. The report says the money was spent on purchases of $50 or less, which don’t have to be listed on state ethics reports.

Segwick County Democratic Party Chair Jimmy Yeager said in an email that the local party committee followed the rules.

“This is the first we’re hearing of any complaints,” Yeager said.

“We have complied with the Kansas Campaign Finance Act and the regulations of the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission. Until we have an opportunity to review, we will not be making any additional comments,” he said.

The complaint was filed Wednesday by Ben Sauceda, executive director of the Sedgwick County Republican Party. He said the complaint wasn’t filed to score political points but to promote transparency in government.

“It isn’t a partisan issue,” Sauceda said. “Any time that we have people influencing elections, which obviously campaign contributions are given for that purpose — to influence elections — it’s important to know who’s giving and what amounts are given.”

Sauceda filed a complaint with the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission on Wednesday and requested an audit of the committee’s past three reports.

“We have contribution limits, and there’s no proof that someone didn’t give over that limit because there’s no accountability within the report that’s been filed,” Sauceda said.

Sauceda said he filed the complaint after uncovering contributions that aren’t reflected in the reports.

For the 2019 reporting period, Kansas Rep. Elizabeth Bishop, a southeast Wichita Democrat, paid the party $100 for a watch party. Rep. Jim Ward, a northeast Wichita Democrat, donated $100 to the committee. The Kansas Democratic Party contributed $480.

None of those contributions is included in the Sedgwick County Democrats’ report. The local party committee also does not list expenses of $250, $550 and $1,500 that it paid to the Kansas Democratic Party in January, February and August.

Sauceda said he thinks those contributions and expenses are just scratching the surface and a full audit is required to figure out who spent money to influence local elections.

For the period covering Oct. 26, 2018 to Dec. 31, 2018, the Democratic Central Committee reported receiving $12,851.50 and spending $6,620.29. The report says all of that money was received and spent in increments of $50 or less, which means who gave and what it was spent on don’t require disclosure under Kansas law.

But candidate expense reports filed for that same period show the committee received contributions that would require disclosure.

On Oct. 30, Tom Sawyer, who won the House District 95 race, donated $1,500 to the Sedgwick Country Democratic Party.

Six days later, Democratic candidate Clifton Beck, who was defeated in the House District 93 race, paid the party committee $250 for “miscellaneous canvassing.”

In addition to the 2019 contribution, on election day 2018, Elizabeth Bishop, a Democratic member of the Kansas House in District 88, gave the party committee $100 for “watch party expenses.”

None of those contributions is reflected in the Sedgwick County Democratic Central Committee’s report.

Mark Skoglund, director of the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission, said in an email that large, unitemized contributions and expenditures are considered when his office reviews campaign finance reports.

“Every entry on every finance report that is turned in to our office is reviewed,” he said. “If something requires more information in order to ensure compliance with the law, we will frequently follow up with that entity. This usually takes the form of a formal Errors and Omissions Notice, which requires a response from the reporting entity to supplement information or to amend the report to correct errors.”

This story was originally published January 20, 2020 at 5:01 AM.