Pat Neal Lawsuit Illuminates Dark Side of Local Politics

A judge will soon rule on a suit filed by a former Venice City Councilwoman, alleging that developer and local political power broker Pat Neal engaged in a criminal conspiracy to funnel dark money into a political action committee used to attack her campaign for reelection. No matter how the case is decided, the evidence presented shines a bright light on the dark ways that big money can subvert campaign finance laws to influence local elections–all while keeping the source of the funding out of the public eye.

Former Venice City Council Member Deborah Anderson had a reputation as a sustainable growth and development advocate–never an easy row to hoe in southwest Florida, where deep-pocketed developers dominate local political machines. In November of 2017, she lost her seat to Charles Newsome, who’d served on the city’s planning commission, where he’d gained a reputation of being pro-development.

It was no secret who developers were going to back. After four negative direct mail pieces were sent out in the weeks leading up to the election, Andersonlost to Newsomeby nearly 12 points. Anderson began looking into the source of the attacks against her and found several matters troubling, including reporting and deadline errors, which ultimately led to fines of $4,000 from the Florida Elections Commission against a PAC called Protect Venice.

Anderson was very surprised to learn that the PAC wasregistered toAnn Stone, a 78-year-old woman who lived 200 miles away in Newberry, Florida. A deeper dive into the money trail revealed a convoluted web of donations, including money being sent between different PACs that seemed intent to obscure who was funding what. In her suit, Anderson alleges that Neal was the one who ultimately funded and directed the attack campaign against her.

Neal donated $100,000 to The Responsible Leadership Committee PAC in September of 2017. The Responsible Leadership Committee ischaired byGainesville political consultant William Stafford Jones, whoruns dozens of PACsat any given time and often deals with PACs fronted by old and unlikely people like Stone. Money travels back and forth between the PACs by way of contributions to each other. The Responsible Leadership Committee sent money to a PAC called Social Justice, who then sent $34,000 to Protect Venice. Anderson alleges that Neal directed $20,000 of his initial contribution to go toward that transfer.

Because there would be no need or incentive to record any such direction to do so, this allows an unlimited amount of money to be cleared of ownership, so to speak, making it all but impossible to positively identify who was behind what ad, and would hence be responsible were defamation or any other injury to a party to occur. This will be the uphill battle Anderson faces in her suit. However, the web her case details should help voters understand how incredibly powerful these dark money loopholes have made deep-pocketed special interests in our state. The only ones with the power to stop them, unfortunately, are the legislators who benefit from their largesse, which is why no earnest efforts to close the loopholes have been sustained.

Another interesting sidebar that was revealed was an odd manner of moving money through a PAC with Manatee County ties. In late March of 2018, a PAC called Friends of Vanessa Baugh was opened with a $100 donation from Electioneering Consulting Inc.,Jones’ company. Jones himself was named as chair and treasurer. On March 30, it received its only other donation, $50,000 from Neal. On April 4, the PAC sent $1,190 to Jones’ consulting company. Then, on April 26, it sent the remaining money to Jones’ Responsible Leadership Committee PAC. Jones filed to disband Friends of Vanessa Baugh the very next day.

The ordeal, as strange as it may sound, is extremely typical and illustrates how large sums of money are moved around, their original donors obscured in the process. If a donor has a relationship with a consultant, they could very easily pick up the phone and direct exactly how their money is spent, while protecting both themselves and the candidate in the process. PACs aren’t allowed to advocate voting for a specific candidate or coordinate with the campaign. They can, however, present disparaging information on a candidate, making them the perfect vehicle for nasty attack ads, from which the candidate who benefits can distance themselves.

By going one step further and obscuring the funding source of such ads, the candidate who is being attacked has a much harder time explaining the motivation behind the negative ads, which often use information that is misleading and even outright fabricated. The candidate who benefits may even be able to eschew funding from certain controversial figures in the form of traditional donations to their official campaign account in order to prevent them from being seen as adeveloper darling, or at the very least make it appear that such donors are only a small part of their support, while their PAC activity might dwarf all other contributions both in terms of money and effectiveness.

As far as Neal's political power and influence, it really cannot be overstated.He is not only a prolific spender in local politics, but he is also a gatekeeper of sorts. If he gives a candidate his support, it goes very far in terms of them being able to raise money elsewhere within the local political machine, as there are a lot of other deep-pocketed donors who desire to be in the developer's good graces for various reasons. As such, it pays to have his blessing, as there are few offices over which he does not hold sway. If you're getting the sense that he's one of the most powerfully-connected and politically-influential men in the state, that would be an accurate impression.

While Anderson’s claims of defamationwere dismissedlast December, the current suit against Neal deals with the allegations of civil and criminal conspiracy by way of the management of the PACs and their funding. But getting a fair shake in the courtroom isn’t always guaranteed, as the reach of political kingmakers like Neal knows few if any boundaries. After all, judges are elected and therefore need to raise money in order to get and stay on the bench.

Also, the increasingly popular practice of sitting judges retiring on the bench so that the governor can appoint a replacement only makes it more political. As one of former Florida governor and current U.S. Senator Rick Scott’s biggest benefactors, Neal consulted regularlywhenever appointments ranging from judges to the school board and all points between were required. In other words, there are alotof people holding all kinds of local offices who are indebted to the developer for having given them the thumbs up in one way or another.

12th Judicial Circuit Judge Kimberly Bonner, who Scott appointed to fill a vacancy in 2013, dismissed the defamation claim but has since recused herself from Anderson's refiled case. Retired Judge Lee Haworth was appointed to hear this case and is expected to issue an opinion sometime in July. No matter who wins, however, the loser will be the average citizen. Until lawmakers fix the broken system that allows wealthy special interests to undermine democracy by funding the fortunes of the very people who would ensure they themselves play by the rules, democracy and justice will both have their reach confined to those with shallow pockets and ordinary influence.

Dennis Maley is an editor and columnist for The Bradenton Times. With over two decades of experience as a journalist, he has covered Manatee County governmentsince 2010. He is a graduate of Shippensburg University, where he earned a degree in Government. He later served as a Captain in the U.S. Army. Clickherefor his bio. Dennis's latest novel, Sacred Hearts, is availablehere.