State board grants relief in multiple campaign‑finance appeals, denies large‑penalty request; approves consent decree after closed session

The State Board of Elections on Monday heard nine campaign‑finance penalty appeals and issued rulings on a majority of them, granting reductions or forgiveness in several individual cases and denying one large‑penalty appeal from a newly registered political action committee.

Emily Marski of the Department of Elections opened the appeals portion and explained the process and materials. Petitioners argued for relief under the statutory standard that good cause exists when administrative error occurred or when circumstances made timely filing impracticable.

Michelle Reef, an Alexandria City School Board member, asked the board to reduce a $1,000 penalty for a January report to $100, saying her campaign email was “inundated with thousands of spam messages” that obscured legitimate notices and contributed to her late filing. The board granted the requested reduction, finding good cause under the cited statute.

Other individual petitioners who received relief or reductions included David Horton (forgiveness of a $100 assessment after login difficulties), Shaun Davis (reduced to $100 after the petitioner reported problems accessing the filing system), Rick (Richard) Johnson (forgiveness after a good‑faith misunderstanding about final‑report procedures), Donald Jacob Westrock’s treasurer (relief after staff assistance reconciled a deposit/filing date mismatch), and Loudoun 2040 (granted relief after filing the correct report promptly). In several cases registrars and staff described past filing histories and assisted with correcting entries.

The board deferred a final decision in the appeal by Andy Pitman, who requested full forgiveness of a $1,000 state‑assessed penalty and said he missed the deadline while attending to his severely ill daughter’s treatment at Duke University; the board asked the petitioner to provide a date confirmation from the treating facility (not full medical records) and will decide the appeal at a subsequent meeting.

A high‑profile appeal from Virginiaians Advocating for Seniors PAC (represented by attorney Dan Backer and committee representative Liz Curtis) sought relief from $9,200 in assessed penalties tied to multiple large‑contribution reports. Staff and the department said the committee had been informed of its registration and reporting responsibilities in October 2025. The board found the petitioner had not demonstrated good cause and moved to dismiss the appeal; the motion passed on roll call.

After an authorized closed session to discuss pending litigation, the board reconvened and approved a proposed consent decree in a matter involving the NAACP (docket reference provided in the record) and authorized the attorney general’s office to execute the final agreement on the board’s behalf.

The board concluded its business by taking the roll on motions and adjourning. Several motions to grant relief cited Virginia Code section 24.2‑953.6 as the statutory basis for finding good cause and reducing or forgiving assessed campaign‑finance penalties.

Notable direct remarks in the hearing included Michelle Reef’s description of an email “spam bomb attack” that obscured filing reminders and Andy Pitman’s personal account that his daughter underwent intensive treatment. The board explicitly separated matters that were discussion only, those that required documentation or staff follow‑up, the appeals it decided on the record, and one deferred item pending confirmation documents.