Democratic gubernatorial nominee Dina Titus shouldn't get on her high horse over allegations of campaign finance violations, her opponent's campaign said Monday.
Republican Jim Gibbons' camp pointed out that Titus continues to be under investigation by the secretary of state's office for circumventing campaign contribution limits through a political action committee she heads, an issue raised before the primary election by Titus opponent Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson.
Advertisement
The Gibbons campaign is also looking into another potential problem with one of the PAC checks Titus wrote to herself: According to one document, the donation occurred during the period when legislators are prohibited from soliciting or accepting contributions. Gibbons campaign manager Robert Uithoven said the campaign is considering filing a complaint on that issue.
Titus on Friday blasted Gibbons for taking $11,000 in donations that exceeded legal limits. Gibbons acknowledged that a mistake was made and agreed to return the money. He said the error was inadvertent.
"Dina Titus should be very careful about her holier-than-thou attitude," Uithoven said Monday. "She needs to be held to the same standard she holds others to, and she is currently under investigation by the secretary of state's office" for allegations of campaign finance violations.
Titus spokeswoman Hilarie Grey said Gibbons was attempting to exhume old, tired charges to obscure his own problems.
"We've been through all of this before," Grey said. "I don't see why we're still talking about it. We think it's been resolved, and we stand by our position that everything is in compliance with the law."
According to the secretary of state's office on Monday, Titus had responded to Gibson's July complaint about the funds, but whether she violated the law was still under review.
Titus' Friday complaint against Gibbons had been received by the office and a letter was going out to Gibbons seeking a response to the charges, the office confirmed.
In Titus' case, two separate problems are alleged, one that was brought up by the Gibson campaign and one that appears to be new.
Titus is the head of the Bristlecone PAC, whose paperwork on file with the secretary of state's office states that its purpose is to "support Democratic legislative candidates." In 2004 and 2005, it raised nearly $50,000.
In January 2005, Bristlecone gave $10,000 to Titus' state Senate campaign, the maximum a campaign can receive from a single entity per election cycle, although she couldn't be on the ballot again until 2008. It was the largest donation from the PAC by a factor of 10.
In summer 2005, Bristlecone gave $10,000 to a different Titus campaign, Friends for Dina Titus, her gubernatorial account. Then, in December 2005, Titus rolled over $350,000 she had raised to run for Senate into her gubernatorial campaign.
Under election law, candidates can legally roll money raised to run for one office over to their war chests for a different office. Gibson took money he had raised as mayor of Henderson and rolled it into his failed gubernatorial run; Gibbons dumped money he had raised as a congressman into his gubernatorial coffers.
But Gibson alleged, and now Gibbons is charging, that $20,000 from Bristlecone made its way into Friends for Dina Titus via the rollover, thus circumventing the limits.
Grey said that wasn't necessarily the case: The $10,000 from Bristlecone to the Senate campaign in January could have stayed in the Senate account, which she said still exists. Or the January donation could have been spent by the Senate campaign and thus not been included in the rollover.
Grey declined to provide proof either that there still is a Titus for Senate account with at least $10,000 in it, or that Titus spent at least $10,000 on Senate campaign activities in the first six months of 2005, three years before she could even file to run for Senate re-election.
The former possibility seems unlikely because, according to the secretary of state's office, it is illegal to be a candidate for two offices at the same time.
Grey questioned whether there would be anything wrong with the gubernatorial campaign receiving $20,000 from the PAC if $10,000 of it came through the Senate campaign.
That's a question of law that would depend on the facts of the case, said Kim Huys, chief deputy secretary of state. Election law appears to state that campaigns for two different offices are two different entities that could each receive contributions up to the limit, she said. But she cautioned that she couldn't comment on whether Titus' activities passed muster because that is still being examined.
The second potential issue is the date of the second Bristlecone donation. On Bristlecone's financial disclosure papers, the $10,000 to Friends of Dina Titus is listed as being disbursed June 10, 2005; on the Titus campaign's disclosure, it is listed as being received on July 10, 2005.
Uithoven said if it were really received June 10, it would fall within the prohibited period of 30 days after the legislative session, which ended on June 7, 2005. He said the discrepancy made it appear that Titus postdated receipt of the check on her campaign filing in order not to be seen to violate that rule.
"One says June, the other says July," Uithoven said. "One of them (the dates) must have been falsified."
Grey said there was a much simpler explanation: It was just a typo. July 10 was the correct date, she said.
