FederalElectionCommission
Washington,
DC
20463
Case
Number:
ADR 431
Source:RAD
07L-49
Case
Name:
Pete
King
for
Congress
Committee
NEGOTIATED
SETTLEMENT
O
This matter
was
initiated
by the
Federal Election Commission (Commission) pursuant
to
jj-j
information ascertained
in the
normal course
of
carrying
out its
supervisory
responsibilities.
^
Following review
of the
matter,
and in an
effort
to
promote compliance with
the
Federal Electionix Campaign
Act of
1971,
as
amended, (FECA)
and
resolve this matter,
the
Commission entered
™
into negotiations with Donald McGahn, Esq., representing
the
Pete King
for
Congress
j~J
Committee
and
Anne Rosenfield,
in her
official
capacity
as
Treasurer (the Committee
or
,_i
Respondents).
It is
understood that this agreement will have
no
precedential value relative
to any
oo
other matters coming
before
the
Commission.
<\i
Negotiations betweentheCommissionandRespondents addressedtheissues raisedinthisreferral.Theparties agreetoresolvethematter accordingto thefollowing terms:
1.
The Commission entered into this agreement as part of its responsibility foradministering
the
FECA,
and in an
effort
to
promote compliance
on the
part
of
Respondents.
The
Commission's
use of
alternative dispute resolution procedures
("ADR")
is
guided
by
'The Administrative Dispute Resolution
Act of
1996,"
5
U.S.C. § 572 and is an extension of 2 U.S.C. § 437g.
2.
Respondents voluntarily enter into this agreement with
the
Commission.3.TheReports Analysis Division (RAD) referred Respondentsfor a
series
oferrorsbeginning with the 2005 July Quarterly Report and continuing through the 2006 30
Day
Post General Report. While most of the errors involved significant mathematicaldiscrepancies, which Respondents failed
to
correct,
the
reports
also
included
a
failure
to
file
accurate schedules
of
contributions,
a
failure
to file
required 48-Hour
Notices,
and
a
failure
to provide identification on more than twenty percent (20%) of thecontributors
on a
report.
The
series
of
errors made
the
Committee eligible
for anaudit.4.
Under
the
FECA, committees
who are
eligible
for
audit
are not in
substantialcompliance with the law. 2 U.S.C. § 438(b).
5.
Respondents acknowledge some soft-ware related reporting
issues,
but contend thatsuch
issues
weredue toconfusingfinancialreporting software resultingindata
inadvertently
being entered incorrectly.
The
Committee worked with
the
software
ADR431(RAD07L-49)
Pano1
Add a Comment