[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6622292,"mediaKeyId","2787211-c9b95700a9f61ee442d6146d406e2a50","parentId",2787211,"title","Ethics commission finds reasonable grounds to proceed to final hearing on complaint over Aura activities","audioSeconds",1175,"startMs",2199000,"endMs",3374000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2787211-c9b95700a9f61ee442d6146d406e2a50&start=2199&end=3374","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2787211-c9b95700a9f61ee442d6146d406e2a50/thumbnail_2199000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6622292/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Ethics-commission-finds-reasonable-grounds-to-proceed-to-final-hearing-on-complaint-over-Aura-activities","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6622292-dcf206db3686b04078f6431d46429135/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136919&Signature=aS6bXzS-wy1StvBigaC~dYrSvizYq6Bq5xNWTdjpNcdou2HpOfpS8VfOiIyLX2jRh8E~TwQtofKCekkNEY01ZKF5ItvyNqj4s71NqdEHWP3BMRW9JvLZn08~ZmIczMDrl1hZ6nSerjSn2DHkZZkUnII66jv3XQyve64x2NLP-cokPqNO7o2r80fFbrjQfJSIkgFGZVGgH82s1RmW5rpX-HefsUmihYUIHdOAuE1Ms~e0vaih-tfwQEYk6I9YrRM9eSB3Yi99lxrR-RllFcbpAsURYeUjeRgI6RKufbanJDdfHxCRXw8Tz8beYQHfNhxshdmw8-X9H5I~OAaPBAkJ~w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Austin","date","2025-03-26T00:00:00Z","article","The Austin Ethics Review Commission on March 26 unanimously found there are reasonable grounds to believe a city campaign-finance violation may have occurred in a complaint filed by Adam Haines against Zachary John Scott Faddis (identified in the complaint as the person associated with \"Aura\"). The commission will schedule a final hearing to examine the evidence in full.

The complaint, presented by Adam Haines, alleges that the organization known as Aura (described in filings as both \"Austin Aura\" and \"Aura for Austin\") made direct campaign expenditures and coordinated electioneering communications in support of candidate Mike Siegel during the runoff. Haines told the commission he documented several instances of event promotion, block walks, flyers, and newsletter messages he characterized as express advocacy or electioneering communications, and he argued that those communications should have been reported and, if coordinated, require political-committee or in-kind reporting.

Respondent Zachary Faddis, appearing and representing himself, said the complaint misstated the responsible legal entity. Faddis told the commission there are two related entities: Austin Aura (a 501(c)(4) active since 2016) and Aura for Austin (a 501(c)(3) formed in 2024). He said the 501(c)(3) has not made expenditures and that the election activity referenced in the complaint was undertaken by Austin Aura, the 501(c)(4). Faddis described the group's work as volunteer-driven, said most materials were produced by volunteers and paid for personally by members, and said the group\u0010spent approximately $69 on food at a few events mentioned in the complaint. \"In total, in all the activities mentioned in the complaint, Aura spends around $69, as best as I can tell, on food across 2 of the events,\" Faddis said.

Commissioners questioned Faddis about whether volunteer-produced materials, organized block walks and newsletter communications should be treated as in-kind contributions or expenditures and whether such activity constitutes coordination under campaign finance rules. Faddis said volunteers paid for their own materials and that volunteers who printed literature listed their names and reported those expenditures as individual contributions.

Assistant City Attorney Caroline Webster clarified for commissioners that campaign reporting rules for city elections distinguish advocacy on non-ballot items from express advocacy and that the city code defines electioneering communications and reporting thresholds. The complaint cited multiple sections of the Austin City Code, and Webster noted the commission's role is to determine whether reasonable grounds exist under the city code definitions to warrant a final hearing.

After discussion, Commissioner Adam Matern moved and Commissioner Patrick Kiel seconded a motion that the commission find reasonable grounds to proceed to a final hearing. Chair Wynn Stanton Adams conducted a roll-call vote; all eight members present voted yes, with three absent, and the motion carried. The commission noted that the complaint named an individual (Faddis) rather than a corporate entity but that the commission's jurisdiction is to determine whether a person was alleged in a sworn complaint to have violated provisions within its jurisdiction.

The commission did not make any final factual findings at the preliminary stage; it determined only that a final hearing is warranted so the parties can present full evidence and testimony. Staff will schedule the final hearing and notify the respondent. The record will include the submissions Haines provided, Faddis\u0010responses, and other documentary evidence the commission requests at the final hearing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Austin - Ethics Review Commission - Mar 26, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Austin Ethics Review Commission voted 8-0 to advance to a final hearing a complaint by Adam Haines alleging that Austin Aura/Aura for Austin made reportable campaign expenditures or coordinated political activity without required filings.","taxTitle","Austin, Travis County, Texas","taxId",2819,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6622295,"Austin ethics commission finds reasonable grounds in complaint against Councilmember Mike Siegel",1578,566000,2144000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2787211-c9b95700a9f61ee442d6146d406e2a50&start=566&end=2144","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2787211-c9b95700a9f61ee442d6146d406e2a50/thumbnail_566000.jpg","/articles/6622295/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Austin-ethics-commission-finds-reasonable-grounds-in-complaint-against-Councilmember-Mike-Siegel","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6622295-bf6180b0ca4d82ea377ec8472bb4dfd1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136919&Signature=Ovl2s~0xtrqVKEGwiXCKiX5PgMEsJEuD~X9bYPXI3O05jdga3OdoSQBGR9qAZ946Jd61OBsj5vNju6WQRPR7rePpHzvnUBunqainoJ5niSWfPsomPyfIFxtcQ2jVvohK5LGG0XWUBR84Ys42mDF~ny1uK4nCBzhMH~8GmlEwyYAQFTfgpVowovHaSOGgF92b9KYQmsglaigTJlC2B~RQ8WjjG9IWhYXWxk1opp1Lko5Bw8LAUgeTWemusXf8SNovY4MuN5VlIIRFGx~WUQwjZ-m0KAnselDkadvz-nv6Oh63shT0XsFKoq23yObTi-bJD8Yux7MY8oaXsRV67PPOpQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Austin Ethics Review Commission on March 26 voted unanimously that there are reasonable grounds to believe a violation of the city\u0010s campaign finance rules may have occurred in a complaint filed by Adam Haines against Councilmember Mike Siegel, and the matter will proceed to a final hearing.

Acting Chair Wynn Stanton Adams opened the preliminary hearing, describing the issue as whether \"reasonable grounds exist to believe that a violation of a city code provision within the jurisdiction of the ethics review commission has occurred.\" Complainant Adam Haines presented his 10-minute statement and alleged multiple reporting errors and unreported contributions in Siegel's campaign filings, saying the filings showed \"at least 6 instances where Mr. Siegel...has violated various parts of the campaign finance laws.\" Haines said corrected reports were later filed but argued those corrections did not comply with the city code's requirements for returning contributions.

Haines told the commission he originally filed the complaint in December and refiled after an administrative notice issue. He described specific items in Siegel's corrected filings — including name changes and a reduction of a total contribution figure — and said the corrected reports did not check the code-required boxes showing a returned contribution. \"He just magically erases $450 on his corrected report,\" Haines said, arguing that omission kept the required reporting trail from appearing in the record.

Commission staff and outside counsel described the hearing process (10 minutes per party at preliminary stage, statements under oath, no cross-examination) and confirmed there were no recusals. Siegel was not present for the preliminary hearing; Haines provided a signed oath for his testimony. Assistant City Attorney Caroline Webster and outside counsel Alan Bohorkas were available for procedural and legal advice.

After commissioners asked clarifying questions about the filings and the nature of the alleged reporting errors, Commissioner Ross Pumphrey moved that the commission find reasonable grounds to proceed to a final hearing; the motion was seconded (second not specified on the record). Chair Stanton Adams conducted a roll-call vote. Commissioners Patrick Kiel, Jordan Pretti, Mary Kale, Ross Pumphrey, Adam Matern, Luis Figueroa, Britney Sharkey (participating virtually), and Chair Wynn Stanton Adams voted yes. The motion passed 8-0 with three commissioners absent, and the commission announced the complaint will be scheduled for a final hearing.

The commission's preliminary decision determines only that reasonable grounds exist to hold a final hearing; it does not determine any violation or sanction. The commission read the contested authorities on the record as part of the hearing: Austin City Code sections 2-2-13 (candidate contribution limits) and 2-2-21 (additional information required on campaign finance reports), and City Charter Article 3, Section 8 (limits on contributions and expenditures). The commission may return to closed session for legal advice before scheduling the final hearing.

Procedurally, commissioners followed their stated practice of giving each party up to 10 minutes for the preliminary hearing. Haines' submission and the commission\u0010s recording of the vote will be included in the case file when the final hearing is scheduled. The commission did not make any findings about intent or sanctions at this meeting; it only authorized progression to a final hearing based on \"reasonable grounds to believe\" a violation may have occurred.

Next steps: the Ethics Review Commission will set a date for a final hearing, provide notice to the respondent, and may reconvene in executive session for legal consultation before taking any final action.","The Austin Ethics Review Commission voted unanimously to proceed to a final hearing on a complaint by Adam Haines alleging multiple campaign-finance reporting violations by Councilmember Mike Siegel.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Ethics commission finds reasonable grounds to proceed to final hearing on complaint over Aura activities

Austin ethics commission finds reasonable grounds in complaint against Councilmember Mike Siegel