Campaign finance board investigating complaint against RGA, Minnesota’s Future, says Common Cause

Common Cause Minnesota’s complaint against the Republican Governors Association (RGA), Minnesota’s Future and Minnesota’s Future LLC has entered the full investigation phase, according to Mike Dean, executive director of Common Cause Minnesota. The Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board cannot legally comment on any complaint until an investigation is complete and the board has made its ruling.

Common Cause Minnesota filed the complaint last week alleging that the three groups coordinated to funnel money from the RGA to Minnesota’s Future without disclosing all of the required donor information. The RGA has provided essentially all of the funding for Minnesota’s Future, which has used that money to run ads attacking Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton.

“By the board moving forward it shows how serious [the complaint is],” Dean said. “I think that it is clear…that this is not a joke, and that they [the RGA and Minnesota's Future] need to take this seriously.”

If the Finance Board rules in Common Cause’s favor, each of the groups could be fined up to $1.7 million. Dean said that he expects to have the board’s decision after its next regularly scheduled monthly meeting on Monday, Nov. 1, the day before the general election.

Executive Director Gary Goldsmith said that the board generally tries to complete an investigation of a complaint before their next scheduled meeting. Because of the laws regulating what can be disclosed before the board rules, Goldsmith could not even confirm or deny having received a complaint from Common Cause, but offered an explanation for how the board investigates a typical complaint.

“Depending on the complaint, it may involve obtaining documents, reviewing reports that have been filed, getting documents from other sources,” Goldsmith said. “It may also involve discussions with parties or even testimonies from parties taken under oath. The parties are always given an opportunity to respond. Sometimes they’re asked specific questions, and sometimes they’re asked for a more general response.”

The investigation is handled by the board’s permanent staff, who then present their findings to the board itself at the monthly meetings.

“That investigation is prepared in written form then for board consideration,” Goldsmith said. “Typically what happens is staff will prepare a document that outlines the investigation, outlines the claims made by the complainant and the response that are received from the respondents.”

Patrick Caldwell is the American Independent’s Minnesota correspondent.