“DitchMitch” Billboard Campaign Violates Local and State Elections Laws, Complaint Says

A new complaint filed with the city, county, and state elections offices alleges multiple political action committees violated independent expenditure rules when they failed to properly report information about a recent billboard campaign. The billboards appear entirely funded by United for Portland Action Fund, a Portland Metro Chamber-aligned PAC, which is seeking to oust Portland’s progressive incumbents.

Seth Woolley, a software engineer and elections watchdog who ran an environment PAC and has campaigned for Portland City Council and for Secretary of State, filed a 182-page complaint outlining 15 separate counts of potential campaign finance violations Monday, October 5. The complaint alleges that United for Portland established three new PACs—goPDX, DitchMitch, and fix multCo—for the purpose of concealing original funding sources for the election-related billboard campaign.

The political billboards in question are primarily targeted at Portland City Councilor Mitch Green, who is running for reelection in District 4. One takes aim at Green for initially failing to pay his property tax bill on time (a mistake he said he was unaware of until a reporter called him, and he promptly corrected), while another focuses on the councilor’s violation of a backyard burn ban. 

Another billboard campaign from the fix multCo PAC aims to promote Julia Brim-Edwards for Multnomah County chair.

In addition to obscured funding sources, Woolley’s complaint also alleges that the committees began the campaign prior to registering with the state, and knowingly reported false dates and incomplete information required for independent expenditures.

Political campaign-related expenditures must be reported to the state within specific timelines. The Oregon Secretary of State also requires disclosure of who paid for the campaign materials or services.

Wooley sent the full complaint alongside cover letters specific to each jurisdiction: The Portland City Auditor, Multnomah County Elections Division, and the Oregon Secretary of State Elections Division. The county and city elections offices confirmed they each received the complaint. The Secretary of State’s office has not confirmed at the time of publishing. This story will be updated.

Wooley details separate city, county, and state violations in his complaint. It outlines three alleged violations of city law, two alleged violations of county law, and nine alleged violations of state law. Woolley also suggests a potential violation of state law, in which a third-party may have paid for the billboards prior to the PACs’ organization and transferred them as an in-kind contribution without properly reporting it. Lastly, Woolley asks the Secretary of State to investigate competing dates and check numbers from United for Portland to goPDX for a $60,000 transfer.

The full complaint argues that United for Portland could have simply paid for the billboards directly, rather than creating additional organizational layers. State records show no other entity contributed to the campaign. Woolley alleges the new web of PACs were intended to complicate legally required information and confuse the public, as goPDX has split $156,000 of a total $160,000 in contributions among each of three new committees—and one consultant.

“The three new entities added names and disclosure layers, while retaining the same administrators and using the same advertising vendor,” the complaint says. “Complainant alleges that obscuring the original sources was the principal purpose of this structure.”

As the Mercury reported September 25, some City Council candidates are facing an onslaught of election tactics from moneyed interest groups who appear motivated to take out progressive incumbents vying for a second term.

In a September 21 interview with the Mercury, Kyle Prosen, the treasurer for DitchMitch, fix multCo, and goPDX, appeared largely unfamiliar with the details of the PACs he ostensibly runs. He said he had been “briefed on things,” and that he had “okayed” the PACs, but appeared to know little about the ins and outs of their work. Prosen said he found United for Portland’s information, and decided to contact them, which led to the billboard campaign.

“I reached out, and I wanted to get involved,” Prosen said. “I don’t know that more than that matters.”

Prosen declined to comment on the complaint when reached by phone Tuesday.

State disclosure records show the new PACs appear to operate as a passthrough for United for Portland’s efforts. The new PACs received funding from United for Portland before sending nearly identical amounts to one advertising agency, Affiliated Media LLC, a company that brokers media placements including outdoor advertising. The reported contributions and expenditures appear to effectively balance out, leaving the question of what purpose the new PACs serve.

United for Portland reported sending $100,000 to goPDX on September 11, according to state records. The same day, goPDX sent $50,000 each to DitchMitch and fix multCo. Then on September 24, United for Portland sent $60,000 to goPDX. The next day, goPDX sent $6,000 to “The Rally Point”—a consulting firm run by former Emerge Oregon director Annie Ellison. The goPDX PAC then sent $25,000 each to DitchMitch and fix multCo.

Doug Moore, United for Portland’s executive director, did not respond to the Mercury’s request for comment. The Metro Chamber did not respond to a request for comment from Jon Isaacs, United for Portland’s treasurer. 

The complaint also suggests the billboards went up prior to the committees reporting any transactions as required by law. State law requires PACs to file a Statement of Organization within three days of receiving a contribution or making an expenditure. However, at least one of the advertisements—a “DitchMitch” billboard on Beaverton Hillsdale Highway—was first visible at least as early as September 7. That’s the same day a DitchMitch website was created, and the day before the creation of two other websites related to the PACs, according to the complaint. State records show the committee statements of organization were effective a week later, on September 14, while the earliest transactions were dated September 11.

Violating the state elections laws outlined in the complaint may carry civil penalties for untimely reporting, with each count for each committee carrying its own penalty. Other violations, like obscuring the original sources of the funds, could be charged as a Class C felony. That can carry up to $125,000 fine and up to five years in prison. The penalties could ensnare each individual associated with the committees, as well as the committees themselves.