Opponent questions contributions to Lauzen's campaign

The amount of money flowing into the political coffers of former Kane County Board Chairman Karen McConnaughay by the end of her tenure was simply too much for Chris Lauzen. As a candidate to replace her in 2012, he vowed to end even the perception of “systematic political influence to be gained” in trade for campaign cash.

Three years later, Lauzen's Republican primary opponent Ken Shepro says voters need only look at the contributions to the incumbent chairman to see his pledge is a bunch of baloney.

There are some similarities between the money raised by McConnaughay and Lauzen when looking at their first three years on the job. State records show McConnaughay, who repeatedly denied any pay-to-play allegations, raised about $232,000 in 2005-07. Lauzen raised $136,908 in his first three years.

While that seems like a big difference, Lauzen has an active federal campaign coffer stemming from his failed run for the 14th congressional District in 2008. He pulled in an additional $76,000 through that fund the past three years for a grand total of about $212,000.

Lauzen's 2012 promises keyed more on the entire tenure of his predecessor. To that point, McConnaughay's fundraising didn't really take off until her second term.

For example, she raised $267,000 in 2008 alone and more than $1 million during her eight years as chairman. That's the sort of campaign activity Lauzen said he's uncomfortable with.

“It's not about having an objection to fundraising,” Lauzen said. “I understand the need to get your message out. But for me, this is about controlling your appetite for campaign contributions. We've tried to be moderate.”

Lauzen said he's returned several contributions the past few years. All came from companies or organizations doing business with the county, as he has a self-imposed ban on those types of contributions. He also said he tries to limit contributions from individuals to $500.

Records show those limitations have been a gray area.

Lauzen did refund a $500 contribution from Wight & Co., an architectural consulting firm that has done work for the county. However, he's also taken $2,000 total from Robert and Edward Bonifas, executives with Alarm Detection Systems. The company has provided electronic security services to the county for decades. It received more than $176,000 in payments from the county during Lauzen's tenure.

Likewise, Daniel Sergi contributed $750 to Lauzen's county campaign fund. Sergi is an executive with Wine & Sergi, an insurance consultant that's received nearly $1.2 million in county contracts the past few years.

Various employees and people associated with Cordogan & Clark, another consulting firm the county contracts with for construction projects, gave at least $2,500. The firm has received $6.2 million in county contracts and just renewed its relationship with the county without having to go through a competitive bidding process.

Lauzen said he's refunded any questionable contributions brought to his attention. There may be some he's overlooked, he said, but “the main difference is at least I'm acknowledging the problem, and my approach is to moderate my appetite. My opponent did nothing to show concern about this during all the time he was in a position to say something about it. As far as the contributions from individuals, I believe there's a First Amendment right to freedom of speech those people have.”

The impact of any campaign contribution on county contracts is subjective. Lauzen said Shepro received quantifiable personal financial gain, via more than $500,000 in retainer and legal fees, during his tenure as the county board attorney under McConnaughay. Lauzen said that's a gravy train Shepro tried to continue by latching onto Coroner Rob Russell as a paid financial adviser.

Shepro said he was paid directly for services as a county contractor and there was nothing untoward about the business relationship. By contrast, he said, Lauzen has been able to pay off thousands of dollars of campaign debt by using the fundraising power of the chairman's office.

Records show Lauzen retired more than $71,000 of debt owed to his congressional campaign. He also retired the remaining debt of an $86,000 loan he made to his state campaign fund via money raised since he's been chairman. That includes a $13,000 repayment in December 2014.

Shepro said there's nothing illegal about anything Lauzen has done. However, just like the accusations Lauzen leveled at McConnaughay, the campaign contribution activity just doesn't look good.

“The issue is the appearance of impropriety,” Shepro said. “It's another example of the chairman saying one thing as a candidate, and then when you get into office you find you have a different standard.”

As for his own standard, Shepro said his campaign is largely self-funded. Records show he gave his own campaign $5,000. The only other contribution large enough to attach a name to is a $1,000 donation from State Sen. Jim Oberweis, a longtime Lauzen political rival.

Shepro said there's little that can be done to reign in campaign contributions involving any county elected office. Nothing the county enacts can be any more restrictive than state law. Like Lauzen, Shepro said his own conduct code will see him limit all contributions to $500.

“Do I really believe any politician can be bought by a $500 campaign contribution?” Shepro said. “Probably not. But it's a matter of staking out a position and sticking to it.”

Five noteworthy donors

Some of the donations to Kane County Board Chairman Chris Lauzen's campaign funds the last three years:

• Patrick Kinnally: Donated $1,000. Law firm has received $269,713 in county work.

• Crawford, Murphy & Tilly executives: Donated total of $1,500. Firm has received $2.1 million in county work.

• Batavia Enterprises Inc. employees: Donated total of $1,750. Company has received about $88,000 in county payments.

• Rich Harvest Farms employees: Donated total of $24,200. Receiver of new county “Sparkler” award created by Lauzen.

• Abe Andrzejewski: Donated $500. Opposed Maxxam Partners drug and alcohol treatment center, which county board voted down.

SOURCE: Federal Election Commission, Illinois State Board of Elections