Editor’s note: This story was updated at 6 p.m. and 7:30 p.m., April 28.
[A]ttorney General Bill Sorrell told a Senate panel Tuesday he wants to clear his name and restore confidence in his office.
Sorrell, who has served as Vermont attorney general for 18 years, has been accused of campaign finance violations in the 2012 and 2014 election cycles.
In a dramatic about-face, Sorrell called for a probe of his campaign finance activities in testimony at the Statehouse.
Last week the attorney general said an investigation would be a “waste of taxpayer dollars.”
Tuesday, Sorrell said the question was not if he should be subject to an investigation, but how best to go about appointing an independent investigator.
“I can’t investigate myself,” Sorrell told a Senate panel Tuesday. “I realize the need for an independent inquiry.
“I believe an inquiry should be conducted by an outside attorney to clear my name and make sure justice is served,” Sorrell continued.
Last week Brady Toensing, vice chair of the Vermont Republican Party, filed a four-count complaint against Sorrell. Toensing alleges that Sorrell coordinated with a super PAC, failed to report campaign expenditures on 16 occasions, improperly coordinated campaign activities with Dean Corren in 2014 and received a large campaign donation from a law firm he later hired.
The Charlotte attorney demanded that Sorrell appoint independent counsel to investigate the allegations.
Sorrell said he was prepared to name an attorney who would investigate the allegations at the Senate hearing, but he was advised that any law firm he selected could be seen as a partisan hire.
The attorney general said he talked with a number of firms but there are relatively few that didn’t have a conflict of interest.
“That was a challenge. That being said, I was prepared to announce [at the hearing] that I was going to use my statutory authority and appoint an impartial, respected law firm to conduct this inquiry,” Sorrell said.
“Then late this morning I got the word, it was suggested, that I should not go along with the suggestion requiring me to appoint this impartial entity, but rather it would be perceived I was choosing someone who was going to be favorable to me,” he said.
Any one of the 14 state’s attorneys has the authority to conduct a probe, but David Cahill, executive director of the Vermont State’s Attorneys Association, told lawmakers that county prosecutors don’t have the resources to investigate elections cases.
Gov. Peter Shumlin also has the authority to appoint independent counsel, but he previously said he is too busy to do so.
Sorrell’s public call for an investigator and a letter to be released on Wednesday from the Senate Government Operations Committee urging Shumlin to name a special prosecutor appears to have forced the governor’s hand.
On Tuesday evening, the governor had a change of heart, according to spokesman Scott Coriell.
“It’s clear that there is broad consensus from members of the Legislature, and the attorney general himself, that it makes sense to have these allegations reviewed independently, and the governor agrees,” Coriell said in a statement. “At this point it looks like the quickest way to get that done is for the governor to appoint an independent counsel to work under the state’s attorneys to review this matter. But we’re working on the details.”
Sen. Anthony Pollina, P/D-Washington, said “pressure was building” for Shumlin to appoint an investigator.
“The attorney general asked him to do it and with the Senate Operations Committee asking him to do it and with general agreement amongst everybody it must be done,” Pollina said. “I think it gets to the point where he doesn’t have a choice.”
The complaints against Sorrell were triggered by what advocates, lawyers and lawmakers have described as a “disproportionate” fine the attorney general assessed Dean Corren, the 2014 Progressive candidate for lieutenant governor.
Sorrell fined Corren, a 2014 Progressive candidate for lieutenant governor, $72,000 for an infraction that lawmakers and lawyers have described as “disproportionate.” Corren was a publicly financed candidate, and under state statute could not receive any private donations once he qualified for public money.
The Vermont Democratic Party sent out an email promoting Corren last fall that Sorrell says was an in-kind donation valued at $255. The alleged violation triggered two $10,000 fines and a requirement that Corren pay an additional $52,000 — the amount of money remaining in his campaign account at the time the email was sent to supporters.
Corren received $200,000 in public financing in 2014, and the balance of his campaign account was returned to the state shortly after the election.
The $72,000 penalty would come out of Corren’s pocket.
In response to what Corren’s attorney, John Franco, called a “draconian” fine, the Senate Government Operations Committee decided to limit the penalty for publicly financed candidates to the value of any illegal private donation. The proposal will be part of the miscellaneous elections bill.
Questions remain about how best to ensure nonpartisan oversight of campaign finance law. The committee will consider the formation of an independent elections commission next year.
The attorney general says he supports the idea of an impartial commission that could review, investigate and/or enforce campaign finance violations.
“I leave it to you whether such an entity would conduct investigations or screen complaints to see if they warrant investigation,” Sorrell said.
Sorrell said it’s unusual for an official to ask for the authority of his or her office to be reduced, “but that is what I am asking of you today. I believe such a change will enhance Vermont’s already progressive campaign finance laws.”
Though he said he has been “even-handed in his screening of violations,” investigating alleged campaign finance improprieties is a “thankless task,” he said. The attorney general, a Democrat, said he has been accused of political partisanship by Republicans, Progressives and members of his own party.
