Election officials subpoena records tied to Malloy campaign mailer

Governor Dannel P. Malloy fields questions after speaking at the Bridgeport Regional Business Council's Capitol Luncheon at the Holiday Inn  in Bridgeport, Conn. on Thursday, April 16, 2015. With Malloy if Stuart Marcus, CEO of St. Vincent's Medical Center.

Governor Dannel P. Malloy fields questions after speaking at the Bridgeport Regional Business Council’s Capitol Luncheon at the Holiday Inn in Bridgeport, Conn. on Thursday, April 16, 2015. With Malloy if Stuart Marcus, CEO of St. Vincent’s Medical Center.

The scope of a state investigation into a direct mail blitz that the Connecticut Democrats did on behalf of Gov. Dannel P. Malloy last October and paid for with money from the party’s federal fundraising account is widening.

The state Elections Enforcement Commission on Thursday subpoenaed all internal campaign communications between Malloy; Mark Ojakian, the governor’s chief of staff; Jonathan Harris, executive director of the Connecticut Democrats during the last election; Jonathan Blair, who was Malloy’s campaign manager; and Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy’s longtime political confidant.

The subpoena also covers all financial records related to the mailer, as well as lists of contributors who gave more than $1,000 to the party’s federal fundraising account, which is separate from the party’s state vessel for political money.

The step was prompted by a complaint by Connecticut’s top Republican, Jerry Labriola Jr., who charged that Democrats violated state elections laws by commingling funds explicitly reserved for U.S. House and Senate contests, as well as presidential races, to help Malloy.

Malloy’s office referred questions on the matter Friday to the Connecticut Democrats, who said that the mailer did not violate the law because it included language that was part of a broader get-out-the-vote effort.

”As we have always said, the (Democratic State Central Committee) did and continues to follow all state and federal rules, laws and regulations,” said Michael Mandell, the party’s executive director. “We took extraordinary steps not only to live by the letter of the law, but also in accordance with the spirit of the law. There is an inherent conflict between the requirements of federal and state campaign finance laws as to how get-out-the-vote (“GOTV”) activity must be funded, and we believe that state law is clearly pre-empted by federal law in this case.”

Labriola stood by his complaint in a statement Friday, saying that Malloy, who was bound by spending limits as a taxpayer-funded candidate, and fellow Democrats have skirted the rules on campaign expenditures.

“Governor Malloy and the Connecticut Democrats made a mess of campaign finance regulations and now they find themselves caught in a tangled web with the subpoenas issued today,” Labriola said. “We will continue to monitor our complaint and we have trust in the process. It is essential that everyone plays by the same rules and integrity is maintained in our electoral system.”

Democrats have been vague on how much was spent on the pro-Malloy mailers, which critics say contained a single line related to turning out the vote.

A Hearst Connecticut Media examination of the party’s federal filings from last fall show Democrats spent $344,942 in the fourth quarter of 2014 on mail design and printing with a Vernon direct mail house known as Mission Control LLC. The expenditures made no reference to Malloy, only saying that they were related to a “non-federal candidate” and allowed as part of Democrats’ get-out-the-vote efforts.

Earlier this week, the state Elections Enforcement Commission was named in the court action by the Connecticut Democrats, who say that the regulatory agency has balked at the party’s request for a declaratory ruling on its controversial mailer.

Neil Vigdor