Category Archives: Statements & Advisories

January 9th, 2006

Permanent Defense responds to Eyman’s latest assault on transportation infrastructure

Statements & Advisories

Permanent Defense responded this morning to the filing of Tim Eyman’s new initiative to gut transportation funding with a promise to fight the initiative and the service cuts it represents from today until the initiative is defeated.

The voters of Washington State are sick and tired of Tim Eyman and his cohorts attempting to tear down what the Legislature and the people are trying to build.

“We have a transportation crisis in this state. If we are not going to act, then our infrastructure is going to collapse. This new initiative will repeal funds that have specifically been earmarked to repair threatened infrastructure,” said Permanent Defense Chair Andrew Villeneuve.

The initiative, according to an estimate by the state Department of Transportation, will cut some $2.5 billion over 16 years. It will practically wipe out the state’s multimodal funding account, which pays for dozens of transportation projects – including rail projects.

The initiative will destroy funding for Amtrak Cascades, freight mobility programs, and it cuts off grant money for local transportation projects – projects that are being undertaken by cities and counties across the state.

“There is nothing funny about collapsing viaducts, hazardous bridges, and rail lines in need of repair,” said Villeneuve. “We can’t have services and not pay for them. If we do not invest in transportation, we, the people of Washington State, are going to suffer mightily in the coming months and years.”

“Eyman is disrespecting the will of the voters. Voters said ‘NO’ to Initiative 912 last November and ‘YES’ to investing in transportation. That decision is being ignored, and now transportation funding is under assault yet again.”

Permanent Defense will very soon be releasing more information about the consequences of this new initiative through its website, including a sampling of projects that will be axed if the initiative passes. Citizens across Washington State are prepared to work together once again to ensure that people know the truth about this proposal and the cuts that will come with it.

December 29th, 2005

Why does Tim Eyman keep getting special attention from the media?

Rethinking and ReframingStatements & AdvisoriesThreat Analysis

This organization – the membership and leadership of Permanent Defense – is getting pretty tired of the special treatment that Tim Eyman keeps getting from Washington State media outlets. Today, Tim has a column in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, entitled “2006 initiative: Save our $30 tabs.” Just yesterday, the Everett Herald ran the very same column for Tim, entitled: “Politicians should be held to their word on $30 tabs”. Why are media outlets going out of their way to give Eyman special treatment?

The staff of this organization would like to know why.

It’s been said that the media is not very good at telling people what to think, but is good at telling people what to think about. The power to set the agenda. To decide what is “buzz” and what is not. We are fairly confident that the media understands who Tim Eyman is and what he wants.

His goal is to destroy government. And his philosophy (if you can call it that) is well summarized in this quote from national right wing activist Grover Norquist, who famously stated: “My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years – to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.”

Eyman’s initiatives are all attempts to reduce the size and scope of government in some way. Not just state government, but local government, too. Most of his initiatives have been proposals to drastically cut back taxes, which has an immediate and significant effect on the ability of government to deliver quality public services to its citizens.

Year after year, editorial boards and commentators across Washington have opined against nearly every one of these initiatives, concluding that they will not lead to a healthier Evergreen State.

Despite this, Eyman keeps getting the attention he wants and needs to remain influential.  In fact, Tim  has probably received more media exposure than any other politician in the state, save for the Governor.

Whenever Eyman wants to “announce” a new initiative effort, the Associated Press usually has an article about it. Whenever Eyman calls a press conference in Olympia, the major TV stations (KOMO, KING, KIRO, KCPQ) usually send their cameras over to the Capitol campus to cover it, and then those stations run the clips during their five o’clock broadcasts. When Eyman submits columns to newspapers, they usually get printed. We know because we keep seeing them.

Last May, our Chair wrote a post for the Northwest Progressive Institute Advocate (the blog of Permanent Defense’s parent organization) taking to the traditional media to task for fawning over Eyman. This post still rings true today.

It is time that regional media outlets stopped giving Tim Eyman so much special attention. There is no good reason why he should be awarded with column after column after column. There is no good reason why the press needs to feel obligated to cover him every single time he wants to announce a new initiative effort.

Why not instead put a greater emphasis on giving more people, especially those active within their neighborhood communities, a chance to express their views? The Evergreen State is home to about six million people.

There are surely many Washingtonians (and many issues) that are far more worthy of the attention than Tim Eyman. The media should be diversifying its political coverage instead of catering to him.

November 29th, 2005

Setting the record straight on I-900, I-912

Election PostmortemStatements & Advisories

Yesterday, Tim Eyman sent out an e-mail congratulating all his supporters on the success of Initiative 900, saying “All of you helped make I-900 a success.  We received over 2400 donations (average contribution was $247.10).”

It’s worth noting that Initiative 900 would have been doomed had it not been for the tremendous financial backing provided by multimillionaire Michael Dunmire. On June 9th, the Spokesman-Review reported on Eyman’s fundraising:

…According to campaign finance records filed with the state Public Disclosure Commission, Eyman has raised about $415,000 for the initiative. Of that, Dunmire and his wife have contributed more than $314,000…

A few weeks later, The Olympian did the same, but with new numbers:

Eyman’s I-900, which proposes an expansion of performance audits for state and local agencies, raised about $617,000. Of that, $489,494 came from a retired Woodinville investment executive, Michael Dunmire, and his wife, Phyllis Dunmire.

Eyman can calculate the total number of donations and produce an average, but he’s hiding the fact that his initiative was primarily funded by one person. There’s no denying that it wouldn’t have been possible without Dunmire. Using the figures provided by the Olympian, Dunmire’s contributions represent nearly 80% of the total amount Eyman raised. That’s a staggering amount.

In his email, Eyman also wrote: “Several recent news stories have made it sound like the Initiative 900 campaign jumped on the Democrats’ accountability bandwagon – quite the contrary…”

Actually, those news stories were accurate. Eyman did jump on the Democrats’ “accountability bandwagon”. House Democrats and the state auditor, Brian Sonntag (D), had already been working on performance audit legislation for years. Thanks to a change of leadership in the state Senate after last year’s elections, the legislation finally made it to the Governor’s desk and was signed by Gov. Christine Gregoire.

Initiatives aren’t difficult if you have a multimillionaire willing to pour nearly half a million dollars into your initiative campaign. If you have the money, you can qualify for the ballot – it doesn’t matter what your issue is or how popular it might be. Western Washington University political scientist Todd Donovan was correct. There was hardly any excitement around I-900. Without paid signature gatherers and Dunmire’s money, I-900 would have been another failure for Eyman.

It is apparent that Eyman is going to ignore the clearly-expressed wishes of voters in the last election and proceed ahead with his initiative to gut a significant portion of the 2005 transportation package.

If Eyman respected the voters’ decision, he’d drop his plans for his 2006 initiative to repeal the rest of the package and move on. But, since it doesn’t appear he’s going to do that, he will be exhibiting tremendous disrespect for the taxpayers of Washington State.

He and his cohorts gambled on the passage of Initiative 912 and lost. They demanded that voters have a say. Voters have had their say, and they’ve put their stamp of approval on Olympia’s work – they want the state to invest in transportation and our future.

The I-695 vote was six years ago, and the I-776 vote was three years ago. The people have just spoken again, and there’s a clear mandate for keeping the 2005 transportation package intact. (And, it should be remembered that King County voted against both I-695 and I-776. Voters in King County have a clear and consistent record of wanting to invest in better roads, bridges, and transit services

Eyman never looks at the consequences of repealing taxes. There is no free lunch. We can’t have services we’re not willing to pay for.

If we want safe roads and bridges, less congestion, a stronger economy, and a healthier state, we simply must invest in transportation.

The Legislature and the people are in agreement. People like Tim Eyman need to get out of the way and stop obstructing our state’s progress. His efforts are not welcome.

November 9th, 2005

Statement on Initiative 900 election results

Election PostmortemStatements & Advisories

“As we expected, Initiative 900 is passing with a fairly comfortable margin, according to the latest results,” said Permanent Defense Chair Andrew Villeneuve. “While the initiative was poorly drafted and not subject to public hearings or other constructive input, voters saw the words ‘performance audits’ on the ballot, and decided that they would like to expand the scope of the auditor’s office.”

Tim Eyman does not deserve credit for Initiative 900. His main financial backer, Michael Dunmire, does. It was Dumire’s money that put Initiative 900 on the ballot. Dunmire poured almost half a million dollars into Eyman’s political committee to support 900.

“We still think Initiative 900 is flawed, and we will urge the Legislature to go back and make some changes to the language during the next legislative session,” Villeneuve added. “In particular, we’d like to see state legislators give the citizen advisory board additional teeth so that all this power is not concentrated in the hands of one official.”

November 9th, 2005

The real Eyman initiative was defeated yesterday

Election PostmortemStatements & Advisories

Initiative 900, Tim Eyman’s attempt to remain relevant, may have passed with misplaced support, but the real Eyman initiative – Initiative 912 – was being defeated by voters yesterday.

Tim Eyman did not sponsor Initiative 912. He was not involved in the signature drive and he didn’t really go out and campaign for the initiative. But he associated himself with the initiative, and put his credibility on the line again with its fate.

Last Monday, Eyman wrote an e-mail to his supporters, which he copied to the media (as he always does) urging his supporters to vote against the “elitist” opponents of Initiative 912. He called it “your one-in-a-million chance to humble powerful.”

It was actually voters’ one-in-a-million chance to hurt themselves, but voters didn’t do it. Instead, they voted Initiative 912 down.

Eyman and fellow I-912 proponents claim that the opposition was full of “elitists”, but that is entirely ridiculous. Initiative 912 failed because of the huge grassroots effort that was put together to fight it. Voters in neighborhoods throughout the state talked to each other and realized what was at stake.

The advertising campaign and all the money spent may have drawn the most attention. But in the end, I-912 did not fail because of “elitist” opposition – it failed because of strong grassroots opposition.

Voters have said “NO” to Initiative 912. So what has happened to Eyman’s credibility? It’s taken another hit. He gleefully proclaimed that the harder we fought against I-912, the greater the backlash would be – in other words, a strong campaign against 912 would result in its overwhelming passage.

So where was that backlash? It was nowhere to be found.

But it gets more embarrassing. In an e-mail dated September 26th, 2005, Eyman told his supporters and the media:

Same goes for I-912, the gas tax repeal initiative. Put a fork in it, it’s done. It’s going to be approved overwhelmingly in November. Why?  Because we’ve beaten this coalition of opponents (Big Business, Big Labor, politicians, and the press) year after year after year in these same tax battles. Even opponents know it’s over.

Tim Eyman was dead wrong. Initiative 912 did not pass. It has failed. The real Eyman initiative on the ballot this fall – the initiative that actually tried to repeal taxes – was defeated in a stunning victory.

Tim forgot one sizable group in the NO on I-912 coalition: the grassroots. Together with the business community, we have defeated Initiative 912. Union members, environmental activists, and Democratic Party precinct committee officers all helped beat back I-912. It’s a landmark victory. Even I-912 proponents (including Eyman) know it’s a landmark victory.

The election is over. Ballots are still being counted, but Initative 912 is finished. Tim Eyman, unfortunately, is not finished, although that’s not because his ideology is popular. Eyman is a demogogue dependent on special interest money to keep his initiative factory in production. I-900 was a product of that very factory. It made the ballot thanks to roughly half a million dollars from Michael Dunmire.

In that same e-mail, Eyman also wrote:

With I-912, inevitably approved this fall, voters will say NO to Queen Christine’s underhanded effort to sneak through a multi-billion tax increase when the voters clearly opposed it.  But of the $8.5 billion tax increase imposed by the Democrat-controlled Legislature, I-912 only repeals $5.5 billion of it. “$30 Tabs, Round 3” fulfills I-912’s mandate by repealing the remaining $3 billion tax increase.  It finishes the job that I-912 started.

Eyman needs to get out of the political forecasting business. He’s a failure when it comes to gauging what voters think.

Initiative 912 didn’t start any job or create any mandate for the anti-tax zealots. Instead, its failure vindicated Governor Christine Gregoire and state legislators for their courageous work in passing the 2005 transportation package. The voters have spoken: they support new taxes to pay for safer, less congested roads. They want to invest in transportation infrastructure.

If Eyman respects the voters’ decision, he’ll drop his plans for his 2006 initiative to repeal the rest of the package and move on. If he doesn’t, he will be exhibiting tremendous disrespect for the taxpayers of Washington State. He and his cohorts gambled on the passage of Initiative 912 and lost. They demanded that voters have a say. Voters have had their say, and they’ve put their stamp of approval on Olympia’s work.

The defeat of Initiative 912 is a watershed political event and a great victory. But Permanent Defense will continue to defend the 2005 transportation package until the attacks on it end. Twice the 2005 transportation package has been approved. Enough is enough. Voters have been clear: Leave this investment in our future alone. We’ll be waiting to see if Tim Eyman listens, but we’re not holding our breath.

August 8th, 2005

Eyman attacks courageous lawmakers

Legislation & TestimonyStatements & Advisories

In an e-mail to supporters today, copied to the media, Tim Eyman tried to attack and vilify lawmakers for their tremendous courage in passing legislation that will move Washington forward.

Tim also revealed that he needs a civic lesson.

If Mr. Eyman knew anything about the government of the United States of America and of the state of Washington, he would know that it is a republic. In a republic, citizens vote to elect representatives who pass laws and run the government. Those representatives are directly responsible to the people.

Mr. Eyman acts as if the legislature does not have the authority to pass a transportation package or increase taxes to fund safer roads – which the state Constitution explicitly says it does.

Consider the following:

  • Legislators do not need to go to the people to obtain approval for every law they pass. That completely defeats the purpose of a republic and is wholly impractical. Legislators should also not be guided just by past votes on initiatives and referenda. They should look to the future and not the past in determining what is best for the state of Washington.
  • Making tough decisions is difficult. Lawmakers looked to the future of Washington State and saw that more funding would be necessary to invest in a good transportation network. We have crumbling bridges and roadways that need replacing. So they passed a new transportation funding package to invest in our state’s future and our region’s future despite pressure just to maintain the status quo. This was an admirable effort.
  • Similarly, lawmakers made decisions to invest in better education for our state and to not be constrained by supermajority requirements that allow a minority to control tax votes in the state Legislature. If voters don’t like those decisions, they can always elect new representatives. That’s how a republic works.
  • The initiative process has disadvantages. Mr. Eyman says he “reveres” initiatives for their “transparency and consistency”. Initiatives are not transparent. They’re not subject to the legislative process, which allows for public hearings, compromise, amendments, and changes. The legislative process produces better results because it allows for revision and for collaboration. Mr. Eyman’s initiatives have a history of being poorly drafted and unconstitutional.
  • Christine Gregoire’s words are being manipulated. When Gregoire was campaigning for governor, she never said she would be against any tax increases. She did say she was against general increases in the sales tax. Eyman and others are distorting her language to make it appear as if she broke her word.

Lawmakers and members of the media don’t need a lecture from Mr. Eyman on the meaning of courage. This is coming from someone who pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars in supporters’ donations for months while maintaining he was unpaid.

Was that a courageous decision, Mr. Eyman? Was that “having the personal strength and the intestinal fortitude to follow through on your promises”? Of course not.

Tim Eyman is the last person who should be preaching about moral values.

Washington State’s lawmakers and Governor Christine Gregoire, on the other hand, should be praised for their courageous leadership and a legislative session filled with good accomplishments.

Mr. Eyman’s attempts to vilify our state’s leaders should be ignored.

July 26th, 2005

Eyman’s phony view of reality

Rethinking and ReframingStatements & Advisories

In a email to supporters yesterday (copied to the media), Tim Eyman again extended his electronic tin can, asking supporters to make a contribution to his “Help Us Help Ourselves” compensation fund.

He also didn’t waste an opportunity to make a number of feel-good statements about his activities, presenting a phony view of reality.

So, therefore, we ask you to think carefully and consider the following:

Mr. Eyman claims that he and his supporters take on huge challenges every year. But how challenging is it to get an initiative on the ballot when you have one multimillionaire donor (Michael Dumire) who is willing to provide over $300,000 to pay signature gatherers for collecting signatures? Getting on the ballot is no challenge if you have deep pockets. A last look at PDC reports shows that Mr. Dunmire provided a whopping 76.5% of the funding for Eyman’s “signature drive”.

Eyman initiatives do not solve problems. They create problems or make them worse. Almost all have been designed to wreak havoc on government revenue without regard to any of the consequences. They result in budget crunches and cripple valuable local public services.

Initiative 900 does not and will not “end a 40 year prohibition against independent performance audits of state government.” The state legislature already did that with the passage of EHB 1064 earlier this year (the bill was signed into law by Governor Christine Gregoire). Eyman had absolutely nothing to do with the bill or its passage, either. State Democrats had previously passed such legislation, and with Democrats assuming control of the state Senate in 2005, the legislation finally made it through both houses.

Eyman also crowed about his involvement in 1998’s Initiative 200, which barred government sponsored remedies for minorities that have previously been the target of grave injustices. Mr. Eyman’s logic of “treating everyone the same” falls flat on its face, since everyone has not been treated the same in the past, and even today, not everyone is being treated the same.

Then it was on to Initiative 695. Initiative 695 was tossed out in court after it passed because it was found to be unconstitutional. The reason the state motor vehicle excise tax was subsequently repealed was because the Legislature and the Governor were afraid of another effort to take away funding. That plan didn’t work out  too well, as Eyman came back with another initiative anyway

In the 1999-2001 biennium, the state MVET was to have been distributed in three main ways: 47% to state transportation, 29% to local transits, and 24% to local governments. This funding was lost after the Legislature repealed the state MVET.

In terms of local distribution for counties and cities across the state, about $496,904,767 (in 2004) was projected to be lost because of Initiative 695 by the state Department of Revenue. The state Department of Revenue predicted that overall, counting both transportation and local distribution, up to $1,700,000,000 in funding for public services and transportation was lost for the 2001-2003 biennium, statewide. The bottom line is that I-695 blew a huge hole into our state’s transportation funding that has never been fully repaired.

Initiative 747, which passed in 2001, hurt local governments and has led to budget shortfalls across Washington State. Some cities are considering disincorporation because they no longer have the revenues to continue offering their citizens public services. The state loss from I-747 for 2004 alone was projected to be $48,753,000. Local municipalities lost $148,415,000 in 2004 alone – revenues that would have otherwise paid for valuable public services.

Ron Sims’ candidacy for governor of Washington State did NOT fail because of Sims’ tax reform proposals. It failed because his opponent, Christine Gregoire, had more money, support from the state labor council, more endorsements, and statewide name recognition (she had already served two terms as Attorney General).

Eyman loves to take credit for things he had nothing to do with, make political predictions (for instance, that I-912 will be approved this November), and play the role of amateur political scientist.

Eyman also likes to claim that he’s “keeping the political establishment on the defensive” but this is coming from a guy whose last four initiatives (I-267, I-807, I-864, I-892) have all ended in failure.

But Eyman lives in an Orwellian world, so nothing that anybody else says ever seems to matter. It’s the “Ministry of Truth” all over again.

January 25th, 2005

PDC fines Eyman and associates after completing investigation into complaint filed by Permanent Defense and allies

Eye on Money: DevelopmentsStatements & Advisories

The state Public Disclosure Commission, acting on a complaint filed August 26th, 2004, by Permanent Defense, TaxSanity.org, and Taxpayers for Washington’s Future, fined Tim Eyman and his associates three hundred dollars for again violating Washington’s public disclosure law at an enforcement hearing Tuesday morning.

The complaint accused Tim Eyman, his associates, and his three PACs of a broad array of campaign finance and public disclosure violations.

The PDC fined Eyman one hundred and fifty dollars each for two occasions on which PDC staff found that Eyman, his associates, and his PACs had violated the public disclosure law:

  • By failing to timely disclose an in-kind contribution received from Tim and Karen Eyman in the amount of $1,500 for a poll conducted in October of 2003.
  • By failing to timely disclose an in-kind contribution received from the Voters Want More Choices PAC in the amount of $2,109 for a mailing.

Permanent Defense Chair Andrew Villeneuve called the enforcement action significant. “Tim Eyman has a long history of violating the public disclosure law, and he somehow thinks that it doesn’t apply to him. The PDC is making clear once again that his careless disregard for the rules will not be tolerated.”

“Eyman also claims, and continues to claim, to his supporters that his committees are completely separate from each other, but the boundaries between them seem to be pretty transparent.”

He noted that Tim Eyman made the following comment last September in a letter to the PDC regarding the complaint: “Our campaign committee [Voters Want More Choices] pays for these mailings and the accounting and other costs associated with our compensation fund [Help Us Help Taxpayers].”

“It’s just been a continual pattern of infractions, both small and large, which continue to land Eyman in trouble,” concluded Villeneuve. “He wouldn’t be getting fined if he would just follow the rules like everybody else.”

August 26th, 2004

PDC should penalize Eyman for violations

Eye on Money: DevelopmentsStatements & Advisories

Permanent Defense, TaxSanity.org, and Taxpayers For Washington’s Future today filed an official PDC complaint against Tim Eyman alleging that the initiative profiteer appears to have been spending Initiative 864 campaign funds for his personal compensation PAC, Help Us Help Taxpayers, among other charges.

The complaint also accuses Eyman and his associates of a broad range of public disclosure violations- including delinquent reporting, as well as conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud.

Andrew Villeneuve, Chair of Permanent Defense, said “When it comes to the public disclosure law, Eyman acts as if the rules somehow don’t apply to him.”

“In his mind, it’s okay to file late, to use funds from one committee to apparently pay for another’s expenses, and to lie about taking a salary.”

“But when opponents do something that Eyman thinks is running afoul of the law, he puts up a big racket and acts like a victim. He clearly has a double standard.”

He said he expects the PDC to take action on the sixteen page complaint, saying “Last March, when Eyman filed his forms late, the PDC made clear that future infringements would not be tolerated. Unless Eyman is penalized, he will continue to ignore the law and get away with it.”

Previously, in March of 2004, Permanent Defense joined TaxSanity.org and Taxpayers For Washington’s Future in filing a complaint to the PDC that accused Eyman of not filing the names and addresses of his contributors on time.

The PDC condemned the delay and dismissed the complaint but warned Eyman that future violations could result in enforcement action.

Once again, Eyman has been caught in violation of the public disclosure law. Money is disappearing from the Initiative 864 campaign war chest, mailings for Eyman’s compensation PAC are suspiciously not costing anything, and donations Eyman has said he’s received aren’t being reported on time, and even when reported late, have discrepancies.

“This entire operation, including all three committees, needs an audit,” said Chair Andrew Villeneuve. “It’s all in shambles. He keeps making mistakes and filing late. Then he has to file amended returns with new versions of his records. And it appears that Eyman is using funds from one committee to pay for another’s mailings, even though he insists they’re separate.”

The complainants believe Eyman is clearly culpable of breaking the law, and has been allowed to get away with too many violations for too long.

It’s time for the Public Disclosure Commission to condemn these violations and penalize Eyman for not following the rules like everyone else.

August 26th, 2004

Permanent Defense, allies file PDC complaint against Tim Eyman

Eye on Money: DevelopmentsStatements & Advisories

PDC complaint alleges conspiracy to defraud contributors, demands audit

A formal complaint filed today with the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) alleges that during the final weeks of its failed signature drive, Tim Eyman fraudulently spent over $26,000 of I-864 campaign funds on a fundraising letter for his personal compensation PAC, “Help Us Help Taxpayers” .

The complaint — filed jointly by TaxSanity.org, Taxpayers for Washington’s Future (TWF), and Permanent Defense — accuses Tim Eyman, his associates, and his three PACs of a broad array of campaign finance and public disclosure violations, including conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud. The 16 page complaint includes supporting documentation.

“Once again, Tim Eyman has been caught lying to contributors,” said David Goldstein of TaxSanity.org. “He promised to keep campaign contributions separate from his compensation fund… a promise he never intended to keep.” The complaint suggests that since its inception in June of 2003, Help Us Help Taxpayers’ operations have been entirely subsidized by “Voters Want More Choices” (VWMC), including over $10,000 of reported in-kind contributions.

Steve Zemke of TWF called the misreported June 2004 expenditure “doubly deceptive” because it occurred at a time Mr. Eyman was aggressively soliciting funds for what he claimed to be a close I-864 signature drive. Mr. Zemke, a veteran of many successful initiative campaigns, said Mr. Eyman deliberately misled contributors about where their money was going: “I-864 was dead in the water, and Tim knew it. Yet he continued to solicit contributions, while diverting money to his compensation fund.”

Andrew Villeneuve of Permanent Defense emphasized that the complaint includes a number of charges that together establish a pattern of abuse and deception. “These violations aren’t just isolated incidents. They’re part of a long-running history of infractions. The PDC should demand full compliance with the law and take immediate action to ensure that Eyman is following the rules like everyone else.”

Text of the complaint

August 26, 2004

Ms. Vickie Rippie
Executive Director
Public Disclosure Commission
711 Capitol Way No 206
Olympia, WA 98504

Dear Ms. Rippie,

The complainants named below hereby give notice of a formal complaint against Voters Want More Choices (VWMC), Just Treat Us The Same (JTUTS), Help Us Help Taxpayers (HUHT), and their officers, including Tim Eyman, Jack Fagan and Mike Fagan. The complainants request a full investigation of the allegations within, and expect enforcement actions commensurate with Mr. Eyman’s documented history of public disclosure violations and the Public Disclosure Commission’s (PDC) prior warnings that subsequent violations would not be tolerated.

The complainants also request that Mr. Goldstein’s email dated 8/11/04 be considered the initiation of this formal complaint, and that this email be considered an amendment to it.

This complaint includes five main charges: 1) failure to report VWMC expenditures on behalf of HUHT, 2) fraudulently soliciting contributions to I-864, 3) improper reporting of donations to HUHT, 4) failure to report expenditures on behalf of VWMC, and 5) failure of JTUTS to meet reporting deadlines.

1) Failure to report VWMC expenditures on behalf of HUHT

The complainants contend that VWMC made substantial expenditures in June of 2004 on behalf of HUHT, without proper reporting by either committee. VWMC’s Schedule A filed 7/12/04 reports two expenditures dated 6/18/04, to Data Resources, Inc., totaling $26,305.72 for postage and printing for I-864. It is the complainants’ contention that there was no such mailing on behalf of I-864.

The complainants, through their independent watch-dogging activities, had received all three previous bulk mailings from VWMC in 2004, within one to three weeks following the reported expenditure date. No such mailing was received following the 6/18/04 Data Resources, Inc. expenditure. However in early July, each of the complainants received a fundraising letter from HUHT — in the form and fashion of previous VWMC mailings — apparently sent to VWMC’s bulk mailing list. HUHT however, reported no corresponding expenditure or in-kind contribution; indeed, with cash reserves of only $11,522.34, HUHT clearly did not have the financial resources to fund such a large mailing during the time period in question.

It is the complainants’ contention that the July HUHT mailing was funded by the 6/18/04 VWMC expenditures, and that both of Mr. Eyman’s committees conspired to misreport the transactions, thus hiding a transfer of funds from VWMC to HUHT. Both committees are equally culpable in violating the public disclosure laws, and both committees should be subject to potential penalties. Furthermore, the HUHT mailing was in violation of statute by failing to include notice that it was paid for by VWMC.

The complainants also strongly suspect that a similar incident occurred in 2003, when VWMC reported printing and mailing expenditures for I-807 totaling $14,904.45 on 6/12/03 and 6/20/03 at a time when signature gathering efforts for the initiative had clearly ceased, but HUHT was just being started.

These efforts to conceal VWMC expenditures on behalf of HUHT would be consistent with the committees’ 2003 activities, during which VWMC misreported postage and mailing expenses in July, August, September and October, only to restate them as in-kind donations to HUHT in amended returns filed in December. HUHT has in fact, never reported fundraising expenditures – indeed, apart from disbursements to its officers, the committee reported less than $50 in expenditures its entire first year of existence, yet raised over $160,000 in contributions… an unbelievable return on investment.

Mr. Eyman and his associates have clearly made a concerted effort to hide the fact that most, if not all, of HUHT’s activities and operations are paid for with funds purportedly raised to support VWMC’s initiative campaigns. The full extent to which VWMC monies have been diverted to HUHT can only be determined after a thorough investigation of VWMC, HUHT and Data Resources, Inc.

2) Fraudulently soliciting contributions to initiative campaign I-864

Through June of 2004, Mr. Eyman repeatedly emailed supporters, soliciting contributions to the I-864 signature drive. As late as 6/25/04, Mr. Eyman cajoled supporters to “hit ‘reply’ to this email and pledge generously to this critical effort”. Indeed, his final fundraising email, sent one day before the 7/2/04 signature deadline included a payment form with the following standard disclaimer:

Voluntary donations to the 25% Property Tax Initiative will be used to qualify this important tax reduction initiative for the ballot. A different political action committee, ‘Help Us Help Taxpayers’, raises money for a compensation fund for Tim Eyman, Jack Fagan, & Mike Fagan for their effective political work on behalf of taxpayers. These two campaign committees are kept separate and donations and expenditures for each fund are publicly reported every month.

The complainants contend that VWMC ceased its paid signature gathering efforts on 6/2/04, the day Citizens Solutions withdrew the petitions from its subcontractors. Apart from overhead, the only June expenditure related to signature gathering was a 6/14/04 final payment of $10,574.40 to Citizen Solutions for signatures previously collected. As stated above, the complainants contend that the actual purpose of the 6/18/04 expenditures to Data Resources Inc. totaling $26,305.72 was printing and mailing the HUHT fundraising letter sent in early July.

Whatever the actual date that Mr. Eyman abandoned the I-864 signature drive, it is clear that by the latter half of June he was fraudulently soliciting contributions for an initiative campaign that was no longer active. Furthermore, his solicitations throughout 2004 included a promise that all contributions would “be used to qualify this important tax reduction initiative for the ballot”, when in fact the month’s largest expenditure by far was a $26,305.72 unreported in-kind donation to HUHT.

Indeed, VWMC has already reported over $10,000 of in-kind contributions to HUHT, effectively compensating Mr. Eyman and his associates with contributions raised to support initiatives.

HUHT is a personal compensation fund, and any expense on its behalf by VWMC constitutes personal compensation from I-864 campaign contributions. By hiding the true purpose of this expense, and continuing to solicit contributions under false pretenses, VWMC, HUHT and its officers conspired to commit mail fraud and wire fraud. The complainants thus urge the Commissioners to refer this serious legal breach to the appropriate prosecutorial authority.

3) Improper reporting of donations to HUHT

The complainants contend that HUHT improperly reported a $20,000 donation. On 7/23/04, in an email to over 3600 supporters, Mr. Eyman claimed that “Yesterday, one of our supporters donated $20,000 to our compensation fund Help Us Help Taxpayers.” However, on HUHT’s 8/10/04 disclosure filing, there was no mention of a $20,000 donation.

On 8/11/04, the complainants issued a press release with the allegation that Mr. Eyman had failed to report a corresponding donation, and forwarded a copy to the PDC suggesting further investigation. In response to PDC inquiries, HUHT filed an amended return on 8/12/04, reporting a $20,000 “pledge” on the date of 7/31/04.

The complainants contend that Mr. Eyman filed an amended return only in response to inquiries from the PDC, and that the reported date of the donation — now called a “pledge” — does not match the timeline of events. According to Mr. Eyman’s public statement, the pledge could not have been received later than 7/22/04, and yet the 8/12/04 amended Schedule B reports a pledge date of 7/31/04. There is also a discrepancy in that Mr. Eyman originally claimed this to be a “donation.”

It is not clear that Mr. Eyman’s 7/22/04 “donation” and 7/31/04 “pledge” are one and the same. Was there really a $20,000 “donation/pledge” on 7/22/04 as Mr. Eyman claimed in his email, or was the 7/31/04 “pledge” merely reported to cover up a false claim? Does the donor really intend to contribute the full amount, and on what date was it really pledged?

Failure to promptly report a $20,000 donation is not a trivial matter. Given Mr. Eyman’s history of false and misleading disclosure reports and unreported pledges – including the 12/2003 “gift” from the jail guard’s union (Case #04-438) – his amended 8/12/04 return should not receive any more credence from the PDC than his 7/23/04 email. The complainants urge the Commissioners to investigate this incident fully, and to levy penalties within the context of Mr. Eyman’s record of noncompliance.

4) Failure to report expenditures on behalf of VWMC

In emails, press releases, and fundraising letters, Mr. Eyman has repeatedly referenced an opinion survey conducted on 10/09/03 by Rasmussen Reports LLC. The survey was clearly commissioned on behalf of the 25% property tax cut initiative that later became I-864, and should have been reported as either a campaign expenditure or an in-kind contribution.

The complainants can find no VWMC expenditure to Rasmussen Reports LLC, or any other firm, for an opinion survey during the fall of 2003. If the survey was paid for by a third party, or performed at no charge by Rasmussen Reports LLC, then it should have been reported as an in-kind contribution, with the contributor clearly identified.

While I-864 had not yet been filed at the time of the survey, a nearly identical initiative to the legislature, I-309, was filed by Mr. Eyman on 9/8/03, and any expenditures on its behalf would have required full disclosure, presumably by VWMC. It should be noted that throughout the summer and fall of 2003 VWMC made numerous other expenditures on behalf of a “property tax cut initiative”, and this was clearly the primary focus of the committee since the initiative was first announced on 6/8/03.

5) Repeated failure to meet PDC reporting deadlines

The complainants contend that Mr. Eyman’s JTUTS PAC filed monthly C4, Schedule A, Schedule B and Schedule L forms on 8/24/04, thirteen days past the 8/11/04 deadline for ballot committees. This failure to meet reporting deadlines is part of a flagrant pattern of violating PDC requirements — as acknowledged by the PDC in response to our previous complaint dated March 17 (Case #04-443 and #04-444) – and which has continued to this date.

In dismissing the previous complaint the Commission cautioned Mr. Eyman that further late reporting “will not be tolerated, and may result in enforcement action.” As independent watchdogs, the complainants rely on full and prompt public disclosure to help safeguard the integrity of our electoral system; while Mr. Eyman may consider his delays and obfuscations trivial, they interfere with the public’s right to know, as demanded by voters in overwhelmingly passing the Public Disclosure Act. The complainants therefore urge the Commission to back up its previous warning with action.

Summary

In summary, the complainants contend that Mr. Eyman fraudulently used VWMC campaign funds to pay for printing and mailing on behalf of HUHT, that both committees and their officers conspired to hide the transaction, and that HUHT failed to included proper notice on fundraising materials that said materials were paid for by VWMC. The complainants further contend that Mr. Eyman fraudulently solicited funds for VWMC, that HUHT failed to timely and properly report a $20,000 donation, that VWMC failed to report a campaign expenditure for an opinion survey, and that JTUTS has continued Mr. Eyman’s pattern of flagrantly ignoring filing deadlines.

In light of the seriousness of these allegations, the weight of Mr. Eyman’s history of public disclosure violations, and the potential for charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud, the complainants request a full investigation of all these matters, and any others that might turn up in the course of further investigation. Mr. Eyman’s persistent efforts to obscure the source of contributions and the true nature of expenditures renders the public disclosure process useless, and thus warrants a thorough audit of VWMC, HUHT, JTUTS, their officers’ personal financial records, and the records of major vendors, including Data Resources, Inc., Citizen Solutions, and Hawthorne & Co., for the years 2003 and 2004.

The complainants look forward to cooperating with the Commission, and will provide supporting documentation upon request. The complainants further request that they be kept informed of the progress of the investigation, and be given the opportunity to comment on or refute any supposedly exculpatory evidence provided by Mr. Eyman and his associates.

A copy of this formal complaint has been forwarded to the complainants’ attorneys, the Attorney General, and to the media.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

The Complainants:

David Goldstein, TaxSanity.org
Steve Zemke, Taxpayers for Washington’s Future
Andrew Villeneuve, Permanent Defense

CC: Rodney L. Brown, Jr. (Brown Reavis & Mann PLC)
CC: Attorney General Christine Gregoire
CC: the media

You are here:

Newsroom > Statements & Advisories

What we do

Permanent Defense works to protect Washington by building a first line of defense against threats to the common wealth and Constitution of the Evergreen State — like Brian Heywood's initiative factory. Learn more.

Protecting Washington Since 2002

Newsroom Archives