This week, the Ethics Review Commission has made a significant decision by unanimously voting to proceed with two campaign finance complaints to final hearings. The commission found substantial grounds to believe that breaches of the city's campaign finance regulations might have taken place during a recent City Council election. Both complaints were submitted by local advocate Adam Haynes and are centered on activities from the District 7 runoff election. One complaint is directed at Council Member Mike Siegel for allegedly surpassing contribution limits and filing incomplete or inaccurate financial reports. The other complaint involves Zachary Jon Scott Faddis, president of the political advocacy group AURA, for purportedly failing to report campaign-related activities and expenditures.

Adam Haynes accused Mike Siegel of accepting contributions beyond the city’s established $450-per-person cap and not disclosing full donor information in necessary filings. Evidence presented at the hearing showed Siegel initially reported several contributions exceeding the limit, including individual donations amounting to $650 and $900. Haynes also highlighted inaccuracies and omissions in Siegel’s campaign finance reports, such as donor names and details about contributions. Although Siegel later filed corrected reports, Haynes argued these corrections did not adhere to the city’s required procedures, particularly concerning documentation of returned contributions. This failure, according to the complaint, represents an ongoing violation of campaign finance rules.

Siegel was absent at the hearing but had previously submitted a written response requesting the dismissal of the complaint. Haynes had to refile both complaints after they were dismissed due to his absence at earlier hearings, which he attributed to an administrative error. Following testimonies from Haynes and discussions on the substance of the filings, commissioners voted unanimously to schedule a final hearing on the matter.

The second complaint focused on campaign activities conducted by AURA, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit that supported Siegel during the runoff. Haynes alleged that AURA engaged in direct campaign advocacy without registering as a political action committee or appointing a campaign treasurer, violating city code. According to the complaint, AURA organized and promoted events supporting Siegel, including rallies, block walks, and volunteer activities, while distributing campaign materials mentioning him by name. Haynes contended that these actions constituted direct campaign expenditures and electioneering communications under Austin’s campaign finance laws and should have been reported.

In response, Faddis stated that all political activities were carried out by the 501(c)(4) entity known as Austin AURA, not the newer 501(c)(3) organization named AURA for Austin. He claimed expenditures were minimal and primarily related to volunteer coordination, coffee, and snacks, totaling just under $70. He also mentioned that any printed materials were paid for by individuals and properly reported as in-kind contributions to campaigns. Commissioners debated whether the value of coordinated volunteer activity and campaign material production could constitute reportable contributions before unanimously deciding to move this complaint to a final hearing.

Commissioner Adam Materne remarked that the described activities align with vibrant political discourse and effective community engagement. He emphasized the distinction between small monetary contributions and individual actions within a group, highlighting why political action committees exist and why they are tracked. The commission's decision reflects their commitment to ensuring transparency and adherence to campaign finance regulations in political activities.