AUGUSTA – Lawyers for the Maine Democratic Party will appear before the state ethics commission next week to argue why the party shouldn’t be fined $5,000 for violating state campaign finance disclosure laws.

In an attempt to clear the decks of outstanding business before the Maine political campaign season begins in earnest next month, the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices is expected to act on Aug. 23 to resolve a half-dozen cases, several of which have generated some recent publicity.

Democratic lawyers are not contesting the nondisclosure of more than $3,200 in mailings for the re-election campaigns of Rep. Walter Ash, D-Belfast, and Sen. Lynn Bromley, D-South Portland. The expenditures were contracted in June and mailed on July 14 and July 20, but were not reported for the campaign finance report filing period that ended July 25.

Responding to the commission’s inquiries, Maine Democratic Party lawyer Michael K. Mahoney said there was no mistaking the fact that the party had erroneously omitted the Ash and Bromley mailings from its report.

“The omissions were the result of a communications lapse within the party,” Mahoney wrote, adding the party had “taken steps to minimize the risk of this sort of error repeating itself.”

The commission staff concluded the party’s nondisclosure was 22 days overdue and recommended a fine of $5,000 for the violation. Efforts to reach Maine Democratic Party officials for comment on the case Thursday were unsuccessful.

Also on the commission’s agenda is a complaint filed against publicly funded independent gubernatorial candidate Barbara Merrill of Appleton. John Michael of Auburn, another independent candidate for governor who is seeking public funding for his campaign, filed the complaint. He claimed the Merrill campaign erred when it filed a campaign finance report stating it had paid two employees for work performed while Merrill was attempting to qualify for the ballot. Commission staff has not taken a position on the complaint, which has been described by the panel’s executive director, Jonathan Wayne, as a “legitimate issue of concern” to the commission. The ethics board could go as far as to disqualify Merrill from public funding or impose a fine of up to $10,000 if it upholds Michael’s contention.

“It’s really going to depend a lot on what both sides have to tell the commission,” Wayne said.

Speaking for the Merrill campaign Thursday, Phil Merrill – the candidate’s husband and deputy treasurer, said there was never any understanding or implied obligation to the two employees who were paid that they would receive any remuneration for their efforts while acting as “volunteers” during the pre-qualification period. The fact that the campaign finance report indicated that both employees were paid for work performed in conjunction with collecting $5 contributions was the fault of “inartful wording,” Merrill said.

“We’re not concerned about this because the facts will speak for themselves very strongly,” Merrill said.

In another case involving Merrill, commission staff members have concluded that a poll paid for by the Maine Democratic Party did not meet the criteria established by law that defines a push poll – a poll designed to change a respondent’s opinion of a candidate by imparting negative erroneous information about the candidate. Merrill brought the complaint against the party after hearing that a poll was being conducted that negatively mischaracterized her policy positions and reputation.

Last month, Ben Dudley, chairman of the Maine Democratic Party, said he would submit the poll to the commission so that it could decide for itself. Dudley subsequently changed his mind and submitted only a small portion of the questions asked and those were offered only to prove that the poll was broad-based and not designed to identify a certain voter subset, which would amount to one of the definitions of a push poll.

Without asking for the full list of poll questions, the commission may never know exactly what was implied about any of the candidates, said Phil Merrill. He maintains that even if the questions didn’t qualify the survey as an illegal push poll, they were probably quite uncomplimentary and would reveal the true agenda of the campaign to re-elect Democratic Gov. John Baldacci.

“Yes, these facts should be out,” he said. “I think then people would see that the Maine Democratic Party was not exactly taking the high road here.”

Wayne said the commissioners were within their rights to request the full poll if that were their desire.

In yet another case involving Merrill and the Maine Democratic Party, the party brought a complaint against the former Democratic lawmaker alleging she had conspired with Republican gubernatorial candidate Chandler Woodcock to manipulate the Maine Clean Elections law when each contributed $5 to the other’s campaign. Dudley argued the act amounted to a quid pro quo, but the commission staff disagreed and recommended the party’s complaint be dismissed.

In a prepared release Wednesday, Dudley said that while the party was pleased with the commission staff’s recommendation on the push poll, it took issue with staff conclusions on the quid pro quo complaint.

“We respectfully disagree with the staff recommendation regarding aforementioned check swap between Barbara Merrill and Chandler Woodcock,” Dudley said. “Items of value were clearly exchanged and the law prohibits that. Those running as publicly funded candidates bear a special burden of meeting the ethical standards set out by the people of Maine.”