[T]he Attorney General’s Office has determined that former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Matt Dunne did not violate campaign finance laws in the way he repaid himself for a personal loan to his failed 2016 campaign.
Seven Days reported in December on seeming irregularities in Dunne’s campaign finances. He ran an “on-paper-only” campaign in 2018 to raise money to pay back a personal loan he made to his 2016 campaign, when he came in second to Sue Minter in the Democratic primary. During that campaign, Dunne broke his own pledge not to self finance his political efforts.
Dunne’s financial arrangement is legal, however elections experts flagged a potential problem about where the 2018 money had come from. Dunne tapped at least 8 donors who had maxed out their contributions in 2016. That meant he could not use money from those donors for his 2018 “campaign” to repay the 2016 debt.
Assistant Attorney General Eleanor Spottswood wrote a letter to Dunne on March 7 informing him that he had not violated the relevant campaign finance law, but advising him on ways to more clearly keep track of campaign spending for future elections.
“It is a violation of Vermont’s campaign finance law to use contributions made during subsequent campaign cycles, from donors who have already ‘maxed out’ their 2016 contribution limits of the 2016 election cycle, to retire any debt incurred during the 2016 election cycle,” Spottswood writes.
However, Dunne only used $21,000 of the $33,167 total he raised in 2018 to pay himself back. And only about $15,500 of those total donations were from donors who had maxed out in 2016 (a group that included a number of previous acquaintances from Dunne’s time in the tech world, including LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman).
Dunne also had about $18,000 in surplus money left over from 2016, a batch of funds that was not taken into account in VTDigger’s story in December on Dunne’s campaign cash.
“Your campaign account contained sufficient funds from the first two sources (2016 surplus and non-maxed-out donors) to cover the $21,000 used to return the debt of your previous campaign,” Spottswood wrote.
“Therefore, based upon the available evidence, there does not appear to be a violation of 17 V.S.A 2956,” she concluded.
To “insure compliance with going forward,” the attorney general’s office said it “strongly advises you to keep detailed internal records of how these different kinds of funds are used for as long as you intend to continue to retire the outstanding debt of your previous campaign.”
Dunne did not immediately return a call and email seeking comment on what he planned to do with the donations from maxed out donors. His 2016 campaign manager, Nick Charyk, also did not return a call seeking comment.
Will Senning, head of election at the Secretary of State’s Office, said Dunne could use the rest of the money for a number of things — funding other candidates or his future races among them — just not repaying his 2016 debt.
Senning said he agreed with Spottswood’s determination outlined in her letter to Dunne. He also appreciated the suggestion that candidates keep a separate bank account for money intended to pay back a previous debt.
“My response to that is it’s something I’d like to bring up with the Legislature,” Senning said.
