AG Re-opens, Shuts Election Violation Investigation

The issued a report last week closing another inquiry into whether or not members in regards to political signs printed in November 2011.

In the run up to the municipal election last year, , as well as others, began proposals placed on the ballot that would have changed the process by which school board members were elected.

One of the members of the group, Concord School Board member , printed up, distributed, and hung up political signs advocating a "yes" vote on the first question and a “no” vote on the second question. The second question would change the board members were elected, from being exclusively at-large, citywide candidates, to a combination of ward district and at-large candidates. Despite the effort to kill the second question, it was approved on Election Day by 34 votes.

But Dunn landed in hot water and was found to be in violation of two election laws – affixing signs to utility poles or highway signs and failing to publish disclosure information on the signs.

After the seeing the first investigation report, state Rep. , D-Concord, requested the attorney general re-open the investigation noting that comments in the report ran counter to published statements by school board members in a Concord Monitor story published after the election.

In the investigator’s report, Dunn said, even though others offered him money for the signs, he paid for them. However, in the story, Dunn told the newspaper that he spent the money on the signs and was reimbursed for most of the cost by the others. According to the newspaper, Concord School Board President collected the money for the signs. The newspaper never published a retraction, correction, or clarification to the story indicating that the reporting in it was incorrect.

In the AG’s March 14 report, Matthew Mavrogeorge said an investigator from his office re-questioned both Dunn and Ardinger on Jan. 9.

During those conversations, Dunn again stated that he paid for the signs with his own money and told Ardinger he would be assuming responsibility for the signs. Dunn said he believed that Ardinger returned the money that had been given to her by other supporters.

When the investigator spoke with Ardinger, she said that either the day of or the day after the election, she collected checks from four other individuals to offset the cost of the signs. Ardinger told the investigator “that there was no organized group that met regularly to plan the subject signs.” She held onto the checks for about two weeks after the election when Dunn told her to return the checks, according to the report. Instead of cashing the checks, Ardinger said she mailed them back to the people who had donated the money.

Mavrogeorge stated in the report that after re-opening the matter, “the conclusions previously reached by this office … remain unchanged.”

Dunn did not respond to an email requesting comment on the investigation.

Watrous said with this report, the attorney general had spoken on the matter and he would not be pursuing the issue further.

“It was a very good thing for Mr. Dunn that once the story broke in the paper following the election that he wisely did not accept the money that Kass Ardinger collected for him to pay for the signs,” he said.