Election finance complaint filed against Chet Hand ahead of May 19 primary

Boone County Commissioner Chet Hand refuted claims made in an election finance complaint filed last week amid an increasingly contentious judge/executive primary against incumbent Gary Moore.

Eighteen days before the May 19 primary election, Boone County resident Phyllis Sparks filed a complaint with the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance, accusing Hand’s campaign of three campaign finance violations.

Sparks, a one-time GOP candidate for Kentucky State Senate District 20, donated $500 to Moore’s reelection campaign on Nov. 19 of last year, according to the KREF candidate contributions database.

Moore, first elected in 1998, has served as the chief executive of the Boone County Fiscal Court for more than 25 years. Hand currently serves as a Boone County commissioner, a position he was elected to in 2022.

During a call with LINK nky, Hand dismissed the allegations, describing them as “standard, predictable, malicious tactics.”

“It’s pretty much a typical tactic of kind of the establishment folks to do that, and usually they do it to try to tie up the other side’s resources, even though they know they’re nonsense,” he said.

Sparks said her rationale for filing the complaint stemmed from longstanding questions about a visible Hand campaign sign posted on a trailer at the Bavarian Waste landfill in southern Boone County – just off Interstate 71.

“I think there have always been questions regarding the signage on the Bavarian landfill that is highly visible from I-71,” she told LINK nky. “I live and work in Walton, so I see it often, and I was curious and I did not see a disclaimer — at least from the highway, so I thought I would inquire.”

Sparks told LINK nky that the landfill is in her neighborhood, and when she saw the signs, she was curious.

“I’ve seen the signage for a while, and it occurred to me that I didn’t know who paid for it,” Sparks said.

What does the complaint allege?

First, Sparks’ complaint alleges that Hand’s campaign may have accepted a prohibited in-kind contribution through the placement of campaign signage on corporate property or equipment associated with Bavarian.

Bavarian, the only landfill in Boone County, is owned and operated by the Brueggemann family. According to the KREF candidate contributions database, several Brueggemann family members have donated to Hand’s campaign this election cycle.

The complaint alleges that a campaign sign promoting Hand is displayed on a semi-trailer located on or near property owned or controlled by Bavarian Waste. It posits that the trailer is not owned by the Hand campaign and may instead belong to Bavarian or another corporate entity. 

If so, the use of the property or equipment for campaign advertising without payment may constitute a prohibited corporate contribution under Kentucky state law: KRS 121.025 and KRS 121.180. Alternatively, if the property is privately owned, it would still qualify as an in-kind contribution that must be reported to KREF.

Because of the allegation involving Bavarian, KREF added the company to the complaint, specifically President James Brueggemann. LINK nky reached out to Bavarian for comment and will update this story if we receive a response.

The complaint alleges that the campaign finance report shows no expenditures for leasing the space or trailer, and no in-kind contribution reflecting its use.

In response, Hand told LINK nky that his campaign paid $3,463.08 for a banner on the Bavarian property on March 2. The Hand campaign’s ‘30 Day Pre Report’ submitted to KREF on April 21 states that they paid $3,612.84 for ‘campaign banners’ from Fastsigns on March 2. The charge is listed under the expenditures category. Moreover, Hand stated that no in-kind donation was needed because the sign was paid for and the space was not for sale or rent.

Next, Sparks’ complaint claims that the Hand campaign did not report expenses for two seemingly professionally produced political advertisements published on social media, which she argues would breach KRS 121.180. Based on the assumption that the videos were professionally produced – given their production quality – the complaint states that the campaign’s KREF filings do not reflect any expenditures to media vendors or in-kind contributions for production services.

Hand told LINK nky the political advertisements were professionally produced, but the campaign has yet to be invoiced for the services, which is why they did not appear in the KREF filings.

“Since they haven’t been invoiced yet, they have not been paid yet,” Hand told LINK nky. “Private companies are not required to invoice within a certain timeframe, and we are not required to pay an invoice that has not been sent. Once we are invoiced, we will pay it, and it will be reported on our next KREF report.”

Lastly, the complaint identifies a professionally designed campaign graphic published on the Hand campaign’s Facebook page that was part of a larger post touting the endorsement of the anti-abortion nonprofit Northern Kentucky Right to Life. The complaint notes that the graphic lacks a “paid for by” disclaimer, claiming it violates KRS 121.190 – the statute that outlines campaign communication disclaimer requirements.

Hand dismissed the accusation, telling LINK nky that digital images do not require “paid for by” disclaimers. He pointed to page 39 of the KREF handbook, which states that “current rules don’t specifically cover internet communications, although KREF does recommend including disclaimers to avoid confusion.”

What is the process for resolving a KREF complaint?

KREF’s process for investigating campaign finance complaints starts when someone submits a written, sworn and notarized complaint alleging a violation to the agency in Frankfort. 

The complaint is required to identify the accused entity or individual, be filed within one year of the alleged violation, and include a “clear and concise recitation of the facts” supporting the allegation.

After the complaint is received, KREF’s general counsel reviews it to ensure it meets the technical requirements. If it does, the entity or individual identified as the respondent is notified within five days and provided a copy of the complaint, including any supporting materials. If not, the complaint is rejected without further action.

In this case, KREF notified the respondents within five days, meaning the agency did not reject the complaint outright.

The respondent is then given 15 days to file a written response. After that timeframe, or upon receiving a response, KREF’s general counsel evaluates whether a violation may have occurred.

If the agency determines there is merit to the complaint, KREF can gather additional information to bolster the case. In some instances, matters may also be referred to the Kentucky Attorney General for possible criminal prosecution. The complaint can also be dismissed at this point.

Once the process concludes, KREF issues a final decision. Some cases may be reopened at a later date if new information emerges or if justice requires it.

Representatives from KREF told LINK nky it cannot discuss a complaint until after two things have happened: The respondent has been notified, and the 15-day window for the respondent to provide an answer to the complaint has passed.

Since the election is less than two weeks away, KREF cannot issue a decision until after the primary. If a complaint results in the finding of a violation, KREF would enact fines based on the findings, according to a representative from the agency.

KREF does not have the ability to take further action beyond that. If the attorney general decided to prosecute based on the findings, according to KRS 121.990, it is possible for the election to be declared void, but that wouldn’t happen until after a trial and determination of guilt.

Due to the timing of the filing, Hand said the complaint was an effort by his political opponent to publicly question his character. Furthermore, Hand expressed his certainty that the complaint would be dismissed.

“The intention of my opposition in submitting it at this time (after the 60-day, but before the 15-day) is to intentionally sow distrust in the eyes of the public and impugn my character, knowing that it will be completely dismissed after the election is over,” he said. “This is weaponizing the KREF complaint process to interfere with the election.”

When asked, Sparks told LINK nky she was unconcerned about a possible outcry from Hand or his supporters.

“I’m not concerned about the criticism,” she said. “I’m actually concerned about what is happening with the landfill and the family that owns the landfill, and more concerned about the amount of support that they are providing Chet Hand.”

Meghan Goth contributed to this report.