CINCINNATI — The Ohio Elections Commission validated one complaint Thursday and rejected another that flowed from the November ballot issue in which voters approved the sale of the Cincinnati Southern Railway to Norfolk Southern Corp.
The commission voted 6-1 that a violation occurred but no fine was warranted for the use of a campaign slogan instead of a political action committee’s name on a PowerPoint presentation delivered to a West Side neighborhood group in October.
By unanimous vote, the commission also rejected a complaint that Build Cincinnati’s Future violated campaign finance rules by making Cincinnati Mayor Aftab Pureval the star of its pro-sale advertising campaign funded by Norfolk Southern.
Build Cincinnati’s Future Treasurer Jens Sutmoller was pleased with the outcome.
“There was absolutely no conflict of interest,” Sutmoller said via email. “It’s very unfortunate that the media reported over and over again unfounded allegations of conflict of interest from anti-sale activists.”
One of those activists said the matter may not be resolved.
“I’m disappointed primarily because we didn’t get to the merits of the case,” said Todd Zinser, a Price Hill resident who filed both complaints in advance of the Nov. 7 election. “There may be some other avenues that we can take to try to investigate this a little further (because) the public doesn’t really know who was behind this campaign except for Norfolk Southern.”
Cincinnati voters said yes to Norfolk Southern’s $1.6 billion purchase offer for the 338-mile freight line connecting Cincinnati to Chattanooga. Sale proceeds will fund a trust that’s expected to deliver more than $40 million a year to the city for infrastructure improvements.
Critics of the deal complained about a lack of transparency. That criticism intensified when Mayor Pureval first denied — then admitted in a WCPO 9 I-Team interview — that the Sutmoller was treasurer of his re-election campaign and the Build Cincinnati’s Future PAC.
Zinser’s Oct. 19 complaint asked the commission to determine if the campaigns failed to file required disclosures for “coordinated electioneering communications,” as defined by Ohio Rev. Code 3517.1011. He also urged the commission to investigate whether Sutmoller violated ORC 4599.03, which prohibits “corporate contributions to a candidate’s campaign.”
But those statutes don’t apply to political action committees, Executive Director Phil Richter explained to the commission when the matter came up for discussion Thursday.
Regardless of the outcome, the case did produce some new information about how the Build Cincinnati’s Future PAC came together.
“When it became evident that trustees of the Cincinnati Southern Railway would exercise their authority to place on the ballot a proposed sale of the railroad,” Sutmoller stated,” I saw a business opportunity to be retained to manage the campaign. I then approached executives with Norfolk Southern to discuss establishing the PAC and retaining my services.”
Sutmoller said he acted on his own volition “without consulting Mayor Pureval.” He also said the mayor wasn’t involved in a steering committee that approved all spending by the PAC and hired SKDK to be the campaign’s media strategist.
To Zinser, that raises more questions.
“The steering committee was calling the shots (but Sutmoller) didn’t identify who they were,” said Zinser. “Perhaps those on the steering committee were part of Mayor Pureval’s donor class. Those are the kind of things that I think we deserve to know.”
