Denver Clerk and Recorder Paul López recently dismissed a complaint alleging several donors to Denver’s Vibrant Bond Issue Campaign violated campaign finance rules with money that may have been taxpayer dollars.

The complaint, filed by Jason Bailey, founder of the Citizens for NO New Debt group, was dismissed almost as quickly as it was submitted, with the Clerk’s Office citing the complaint was incomplete.

“Your complaint fails to specifically identify the section or sections of Denver’s campaign finance laws that the respondent allegedly violated, nor does it include the date or dates of each alleged violation,” a letter from the Clerk’s Compliance Team said. “In addition, the complaint lacks sufficient facts giving rise to the alleged violation. Therefore, the complaint is dismissed.”

Bailey said his group will continue to pursue the complaint until he gets an answer, but insists he shouldn’t have to be the campaign finance expert and feels as if the Clerk’s Office is brushing him – and the concern – off.

A staff attorney representing the Denver Clerk and Recorder’s Office told The Denver Gazette in a statement that the office has had an open line of communication with Bailey on the matter and will continue to do so.

As for Bailey’s submission, city legal officials argue the devil is in the details.

“Denver law requires that a valid complaint contain certain information, including citation to the specific provisions of Denver campaign finance law alleged to have been violated and sufficient facts to support the allegations,” the staff attorney said. “When a complaint does not contain the information required by law, we dismiss the complaint. But a complainant may refile and include the missing information.”

The information required by law allows the Clerk’s office to review the complaint and decide if the named individual or organization should be asked to respond to the allegations.

“Here, the complaint did not provide enough information that would allow our office to proceed with the complaint process,” the attorney said.

“It is possible that the complainant believed there to be a violation of the Denver campaign finance law that prohibits the use of city funds to advocate for or against a ballot measure,” the attorney said. “But that prohibition is specific to city departments, agencies, boards, commissions, officers, or employees. Denver’s code does not reference funds from other governmental or nonprofit entities.”

Without the additional information, election office officials were unable to proceed with the complaint. 

Spokesperson for the Vibrant Denver Bond Issue Campaign, Mike Strott, stands firm in asserting that Bailey’s complaint “was completely baseless.”

“We appreciate the Denver Elections Division for quickly dismissing it,” Strott said in an email to The Denver Gazette. The organizations identified in the complaint are not public entities. They are all independent nonprofit organizations. There is no restriction on these entities contributing to campaigns, nor is there any restriction that prohibits a campaign from accepting their contributions.”

The Denver Gazette reached out to the Denver Botanic Gardens, one of the donors named in Bailey’s complaint, to better understand how donations are made and what internal controls might be in place.

A response has not been returned as of the publishing of this article.

Bailey has also submitted a complaint to the Colorado Secretary of State, but has not received a ruling.  

With less than three weeks to go, voters will consider Mayor Mike Johnston’s Vibrant Denver Bond, which, if all five questions are passed,  would allow the city to take on $950 million in additional debt to repair and improve city infrastructure and community spaces — including roads, bridges, parks, playgrounds, recreation centers, and libraries.

The 6-year general obligation bond would not raise taxes, but city officials state that over the term, it could cost the city as much as $1.8 billion.