July 9, 1997
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
James P. Hoffa
July 9, 1997
Page 1
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Ken Paff
Teamsters for a Democratic Union
7437 Michigan Avenue
Detroit, MI 48210
Ron Carey Campaign
c/o Susan Davis
Cohen, Weiss & Simon
330 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
Ron Carey, General President
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
James P. Hoffa Slate
c/o Patrick J. Szymanski
Baptiste & Wilder
1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Stand Up for Teamsters Slate
c/o Leroy Ellis, Jr.
10733 S. Western Avenue
Chicago, IL 60643
John Sullivan, Associate General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Paul Alan Levy
Public Citzen Litigation Group
1600 29th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20009
James P. Hoffa
July 9, 1997
Page 1
Re: Election Officer Case No. Post-44-TDU-EOH
Gentlepersons:
A post-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 3(a) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by James P. Hoffa. Mr. Hoffa alleges that the Teamsters for a Democratic Union (“TDU”), an independent committee that supported the Carey slate in the International officer election, raised funds from prohibited employers. Mr. Hoffa’s protest is based upon an article which appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle on March 22, 1997. The article, which primarily addressed the donations to TCFU, contains the following paragraph:
James P. Hoffa
July 9, 1997
Page 1
But Ken Paff, an activist with the reformist Teamsters for a Democratic Union, downplayed the entire controversy. “It’s not a big shock that liberals supported Carey,” he said. “I try to raise money from the same people myself.”
Other than the quoted newspaper article, the protester has not presented evidence to support these allegations.
TDU responds that this protest is entirely specious. TDU notes that the quotation makes no reference to raising monies for TDU. TDU asserts that Mr. Paff was referring to fundraising efforts by the Teamsters Rank and File Defense Fund (“TRF”), which raises money from non-Teamsters.[1] To the extent that the protester assumes that TDU conducted fundraising among the five contributors to TCFU listed in the newspaper article or prohibited contributors, TDU denies the allegation.
This protest was investigated by Election Office Staff Member Kathryn Naylor.
As part of its CCER filings, TDU submits records reporting all income received and disbursements made by TDU. In accordance with the Election Officer’s monitoring of CCERs, Election Office staff has reviewed all TDU CCERs submitted after December 14, 1995.[2] In Sargent, P-249-LU283-MGN (May 21, 1991), Election Officer Holland disregarded or exempted certain categories of income received by TDU as “campaign contributions.”
There is no evidence that TDU solicited or accepted contributions from employers.[3]
Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
James P. Hoffa
July 9, 1997
Page 1
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within three (3) days of receipt of this letter. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Officer in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing and shall be served on:
Kenneth Conboy, Esq.
Latham & Watkins
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
New York, NY 10022
Fax (212) 751-4864
Copies of the request for hearing must be served on the parties listed above as well as upon the Election Officer, 400 N. Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, DC 20001, Facsimile
(202) 624-3525. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Barbara Zack Quindel
Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
1
[1]The Election Officer notes that TRF, as a foundation, is prohibited from making campaign contributions to candidates, slates and independent committees. The Election Officer has accordingly reviewed TDU’s ledgers to ensure that TDU does not receive any support from TRF. TRF’s acceptance of monies from “employers” as defined by the Rules is not subject to regulation under the Rules.
[2]In her decision in Halberg, P-019-LU174-PNW, et al. (December 14, 1995) (Decision on Remand), the prior ledgers of TDU were reviewed.
[3]A review of the cumulative ledger of income received by the TDU from January 1, 1996 through December 20, 1996 revealed that contributions were received from nine non-Teamsters. The Election Officer’s review in this matter reconfirmed her findings in Halberg, that “TDU takes very little money from nonmembers. The only nonmembers from whom it accepts contributions and donations are former staff members or members who are known by the TDU staff to be nonemployers.” The evidence received from each of these contributors demonstrates that each occupies a non-supervisory position with an employer or is not employed.