Questions of Public Corruption Plague Rep. Dan Kristiansen's Campaign

By Elizabeth A. Scott--Monroe, WA.

A formal complaint filed with the Public Disclosure Commission in late July raises serious questions of public corruption involving the Minority Caucus Chair, Representative Dan Kristiansen of the 39th LD.

The Questions: Evidence (as follows) obtained through the PDC begs several questions, including whether or not Rep. Dan Kristiansen violated WA state law by accepting $8,000 from corporations belonging to The Rairdon Auto Group and the WA State Automotive Dealers PAC.

It also forces the question as to whether or not the campaign contributions were intended as a bribe, and if Rep. Dan Kristiansen committed quid pro quo by sponsoring legislation (HB 2182) that would lower The Rairdon Auto Group's B & O tax rate.

The Facts: PDC records (http://www.pdc.wa.gov/) show that, on June 14, 2010, Kristiansen accepted maximum individual campaign donations of $1,600 from each of four businesses:

(1) Rairdon's Chrysler Jeep of Kirkland: $800 + $800
(2) Rairdon's Dodge Chrysler Jeep of Monroe: $800 + $800
(3) Rairdon's Dodge Chrysler Jeep of Smokey Point: $800 + $800
(4) Rairdon's of Bellingham: $800 + $800

At first glance, each business appears to be independently owned. If so, their contributions are in compliance with the $1,600 individual limit. Each business is individually registered with the state of WA through separate names such as DCOB, Inc., and CJOK, Inc., supporting the individual ownership assumption.

Further research into direction of the Rairdon corporations, however, suggests that Angela and Greg Rairdon have ownership and/or controlling interest in all of them (http://www.fortress.wa.gov/). They also advertise "family ownership" on their website, http://www.rairdon.com/.

The Law: WAC 390-16-309, "...two or more entities shall be treated as one entity and share a contribution limit under RCW 42.17.640 if one of the entities is established, financed, maintained or controlled by the other, as evidenced by any one of the following factors...(b) Whether one entity has authority or the ability to direct or participate, other than through a vote as a member, in the governance of another entity...or has authority or the ability to hire, appoint, demote or otherwise control...the officers or other decision making employees or member of another entity..." (www.pdc.wa.gov)

Common ownership and/or controlling interest in multiple corporations seems to qualify the businesses as related for the purposes of campaign contributions under RCW 42.17.640. Yet, Rep. Kristiansen also accepted an additional $1,600 from the WA State Auto Dealers PAC.

According to the PDC, he took the money in two $800 installments--one on November 5, 2009 and the other on July 13, 2010. Corporations in WA state, however, must share contribution limits with their PAC (See WAC 390-16-309 and WAC 390-16-311).

The $8,000 Kristiansen accepted from the automobile industry, mostly through interests controlled by Angela and Greg Rairdon of the Rairdon Auto Group, constitutes roughly 10% of Kristiansen's campaign war chest. It's an amount way beyond the means of most people, PACs, and individual businesses. In that light, it also seems reasonable to ask if the contributions were meant as a bribe in violation of federal law.

Since corporations and interest groups are expected to make contributions to legislators with whom they agree, bribery is a difficult question. The huge, possibly illegal sum of money the Rairdon family donated to Kristiansen's 2010 campaign might suggest public corruption, but could also easily be dismissed as speculation without clear evidence of quid pro quo.

According to the American Bar Association (www.abanet.org/buslaw/blt/2009-03-04/baran.shtml):

"No Quid Pro Quo...Under no circumstances may anyone provide a campaign contribution or anything else of value to a government official in exchange for an official act. That is quid pro quo, or what the laws usually refers to as bribes and gratuities. While rare, it is not unheard of for an official...to be tried for bribery in connection with campaign contributions... [It] will focus on whether the official or the lobbyist offered or requested a contribution in exchange for an official act such as introducing a bill..."

Given the American Bar Association's warnings, did Rep. Kristiansen commit quid pro quo? During the 2009 legislative session, Rep. Kristiansen was involved in the sponsorship of legislation that would reduce taxes specifically--and only--for automotive dealers. From the Legislative Digest (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Digests/Legislative%20Digests/LEGISLATIVE520DIGEST%202009%20NO.%2024.pdf):

"HB 2182 by Representatives Condotta, Ericks, Blake, Hope, Dammeier, Kelley, and Kristiansen: Reducing the business and occupation tax rate until July 1, 2024, for retailers, wholesalers, and service providers of motor vehicles. -2009 REGULAR SESSION"

Given the facts available through the Public Disclosure Commission and the Washington State Department of Licensing, it does seem reasonable to ask if the $8,000 Rep. Kristiansen accepted from Angela and Greg Rairdon and the WA State Automotive Dealers PAC was $6,400 more than state law allows.

It also seems reasonable to ask of this unusually large contribution was intended as payment for his sponsorship of HB 2182--legislation that would result in potentially millions of dollars in cash for Rairdon family businesses.

On or about July 30, 2010, a formal complaint was received by the WA State Public Disclosure Commission concerning the campaign contributions accepted by Kristiansen on behalf of Rairdon businesses. The ensuing Public Disclosure Commission meeting, held on August 26th at 9:30 AM, was blacked out. The live Internet feed of the proceedings usually provided for public viewing was cancelled.

The people of the 39th LD are waiting for an answers.