1 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1050 FIRST STREET, N.E.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463

BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

In the Matter of ) 

 ) MUR 7882

Christy Smith for Congress, et al. ) 

) 

 

STATEMENT OF REASONS OF CHAIRMAN ALLEN DICKERSON

AND COMMISSIONERS SEAN J. COOKSEY AND JAMES E. “TREY” TRAINOR, III

The complaint in this Matter alleged that the authorized campaign committee 

of Christy Smith, who unsuccessfully sought election to represent California’s 25th 

Congressional district in the 2020 election, failed to properly report the committee’s 

salary disbursements to staff, and our Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) 

recommended a substantial financial penalty as recompense for the error. Because 

we concluded that civil enforcement would not be a wise use of Commission resources, 

we voted to invoke the agency’s prosecutorial discretion and dismiss.1

* * * 

11 C.F.R. § 104.3(b)(2) requires that candidate committees report “the total 

amount of disbursements made during” a given “reporting period,” including the 

committee’s itemized and unitemized “operating expenditures.”2 Specifically, the 

committee must report “[e]ach person to whom an expenditure in an aggregate 

amount or value in excess of $200 within the election cycle is made by the reporting 

authorized committee to meet the authorized committee’s operating expenses, 

together with the date, amount, and purpose of each expenditure.”3 

Our regulations define “purpose” as “a brief statement or description of why 

the disbursement was made” and provide a non-exhaustive list of “[e]xamples of 

statements or descriptions which meet” that “requirement[]...includ[ing]...dinner 

1 Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821 (1985).

2 11 C.F.R. § 104.3(b)(2).

3 11 C.F.R. § 104.3(b)(4)(i).

MUR788200046
2 

expenses, media, salary, polling, travel, party fees, phone banks, travel expenses, 

travel expense reimbursement, and catering costs.”4 

The Smith committee timely filed its reports during the 2020 election cycle and 

reported $656,580 in expenditures to Method Campaign Services (“MCS”).5 MCS is a 

“campaign consulting firm that provides a variety of campaign services, including 

community outreach, coalition building, data and strategy services, political 

campaign services, and text messaging services.”6 Pursuant to our regulations, the 

Smith committee itemized these expenditures using terms, such as “campaign 

consulting” and “payroll,” substantially similar to those that fall within the

regulatory safe harbor.7

The complaint argued that the payments listed as “salary” and “payroll” were 

inappropriately reported because those particular disbursements, which the Smith 

committee listed as going to MCS, ought instead to have reflected “the names and 

salaries of [Smith’s] campaign staff.”8 The committee responded that Smith was not 

routing payments to her committee’s staff as though MCS were “a payroll company 

processing the Committee’s employee payroll.”9 Rather, all disbursements to MCS 

went solely to pay for the work of MCS’s employees.10 We found this response credible, 

and neither the Complainant nor OGC provided any evidence to contradict these 

assertions. 

Thus, we were faced with question of whether the committee’s reporting of 

these disbursements, “when considered along with the identity of the disbursement 

recipient, [was] sufficiently specific to make the purpose of the disbursement clear.”11

The Committee listed “salary” or “payroll” to explain payments to MCS for services 

4 Id. The regulation also provides examples of insufficient “purpose” statements, such as “advance, 

election day expenses, other expenses, expenses, expense reimbursement, miscellaneous, outside 

services, get-out-the-vote and voter registration.” Id. 

5 First Gen’l Counsel’s Report (“FGCR”) at 10, MUR 7882 (Christy Smith for Congress, et al.), Dec. 23, 

2021. 

6 Resp. of Christy Smith for Congress at 2, Mar. 17, 2021.

7 FGCR at 2-3 (breaking down the itemizations in a chart).

8 Complaint at 2.

9 Resp. at 2 (emphasis removed). 

10 Id. 

11 Statement of Policy: “Purpose of Disbursement” Entries for Filings with the Commission, 72 Fed. 

Reg. 887 (Jan. 9, 2007) (citing 11 C.F.R. §§ 104.3(b)(3)(i)(B), (b)(4)(i)(A)).

MUR788200047
MUR788200048