One Logan Square 

130 North 18th Street |Philadelphia, PA 19103-6998 

Phone: 215 - 569 - 5536 

Fax: 215 - 832 - 5417 

Email: mark. lee@blankrome.com 

January 31, 2022 

VIA EMAIL 

Federal Election Commission 

Audit Division 

1050 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20463 

Re: Response to Draft Final Audit Report 

Association for Emergency Responders and Firefighters 

LRA 1113 

Dear Ms. Pacious: 

We submit this Response to the Draft Final Audit Report (“DFAR”) provided by the Audit 

Division on January 11, 2022. AERF declines its option to request a hearing. 

The Association for Emergency Responders and Firefighters (“AERF”) has operated as a 

nonconnected, expenditure-only political action committee since 2017. AERF uses independent 

expenditures to support candidates and politics at the local, state, and federal levels who support 

legislation for first responders including but not limited to: health care, mental health services, 

long-term assistance, and protection. 

Prior to forming this committee, Treasurer Bob Piaro operated two successful 501(c)(3) 

organizations dedicated to combating veteran homelessness. One was based in Wisconsin 

(Veterans Assistance Foundation) and one was based in California (California Veterans Assistance 

Foundation). Both organizations provided housing assistance, including providing homes for 

veterans. It also provided assorted other assistance, such as assistance securing employment or 

food. Mr. Piaro formed Veterans Assistance Foundation in 1994 with the support of former 

Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson. Governor Thompson requested that Mr. Piaro establish 

and run a state-supported program in conjunction with the Wisconsin Department of Veterans 

Affairs. Mr. Piaro received a grant from the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs to start the 

program. Mr. Piaro served as President and CEO of both organizations until 2016, when he 

transitioned his support for veterans issues into a political effort. 

Unlike many PACs that operate behemoth organizations, Mr. Piaro formed AERF as a 

family-run committee supported only by Mr. Piaro and his two daughters, Michelle Hammen and 

Melissa Stetler. Both daughters are employed full-time as nurses. They engage in AERF related 

activities in addition to their full-time jobs. 

Blank Rome LLP | blankrome.com 
 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 2 

A novice to the world of political campaigns at the time he founded AERF in 2017, Mr. 

Piaro engaged a small law firm based out of Milwaukee, Wisconsin to provide counsel and 

compliance advice related to Federal Election Commission statutes and regulations. The law firm 

presented itself to Mr. Piaro as experienced in the industry and Federal Election Commission 

matters. Unfortunately, the law firm’s services during 2017 and 2018 were not satisfactory. It was 

during this time that AERF encountered numerous reporting issues. Without adequate legal 

counsel these issues accumulated. Mr. Piaro began to recognize these ongoing issues and, as a 

result, AERF ended its relationship with the former law firm and thereafter engaged Blank Rome 

LLP for legal matters. 

As a small, family-run committee, AERF relies on the expertise and support of outside 

vendors. The vendors provide support in each one’s area of expertise, including solicitations, 

marketing, and general fundraising. An accounting firm, EWH, provides accounting and related 

services. The required Federal Elections Commission reporting is provided by a reporting team 

that has improved at the reporting function over time. 

Consequently, AERF has drastically improved its reporting procedures and performance 

over time. This improvement has coincided with ongoing efforts to develop and implement an 

effective filing software. After more than two years of effort and refinement, the FEC approved 

the filing software, PACSmart, that AERF’s reporting team uses to file required reports. In 

addition, with the support of Blank Rome, the assorted vendors have continued to refine their 

practices to improve compliance, particularly as it relates to recordkeeping and reporting. Blank 

Rome and AERF have developed an Internal Control and Compliance Manual. 

AERF has demonstrated the improvements to the process and procedures throughout this 

letter response. Each response to a finding includes not only a general explanation or response to 

the report finding, but also an explanation of the improvements to process and procedures as 

applied to the specific issue raised in each finding. AERF submits the following responses to each 

Draft Final Audit Report Finding. 

I. Finding 1 – Increased Activity – 52 U.S.C. §30104(b) 

During audit fieldwork, in addition to examining AERF’s most recent reports filed prior to 

the audit notification, the Audit staff also compared AERF’s originally filed reports with its bank 

records. The purpose of this additional reconciliation was to identify the degree to which AERF 

had misstated its original filings. 

The Audit staff calculated that AERF understated its disbursements by $769,804 on the 

original reports filed for the two-year period ending December 31, 2018. This understatement was 

primarily due to AERF’s failure to disclose disbursements totaling $628,383 on its originally filed 

2018 April Quarterly and July Quarterly Reports. 

2 
 

 

 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 3 

The Audit staff discussed this matter with AERF representatives during the exit conference 

and provided the relevant schedule. In response to the exit conference, AERF stated that it has 

previously filed the necessary amended disclosure reports to correct the reporting errors. AERF 

explained that its original 2018 April Quarterly Report failed to disclose the payroll entries totaling 

$83,367 and its 2018 July Quarterly Report was inadvertently uploaded without the corresponding 

disbursements totaling $628,383. AERF stated that it has implemented “processes and procedures 

to avoid similar errors in the future.” 

The Audit staff recommends that AERF provide any additional comments to the Draft Final 

Audit Report as it deems relevant to this matter. 

A. Response 

AERF continues to follow and refine the processes and procedures implemented in 

response to this FEC audit and assorted written reports. These improvements are described in detail 

below. To summarize, improvements continue to alleviate many of the errors that occurred in 2017 

and 2018, including (1) communication and document sharing with AERF’s accounting firm, 

EWH; (2) the PACSmart filing software; and (3) procedures for reviewing materials required for 

FEC. Additionally, AERF’s current reconciliation processes have been largely effective at 

detecting issues before filing the required reports. 

B. Implementation of Process and Improvements 

AERF has implemented processes and procedures to avoid similar errors in the future. As 

an initial point, the improved communication between EWH and the reporting team, as well as the 

increased sharing of source documents required for filing, has alleviated many of the errors that 

occurred in 2017 and 2018. The reporting team now communicates with EWH, receives expenses 

and bank statements, and reconciles the amounts included on the expense reports compiled by 

EWH against the bank statements and other relevant financial data. 

Likewise, the current reconciliation process would detect issues before filing the reports. 

The increased communication between the reporting team and EWH, and the monthly expense 

documents provided by EWH to the reporting team, have together greatly improved the process 

for reporting. For further detail, AERF and its reporting team have instituted the following 

improvements: 

 Added a function to the PACSmart filing software that produces a color-coded variation 

report to detect differences between deposit and disbursement data in comparison to the 

bank statements. 

 When populating the F3X form, the PACSmart filing software color codes the deposit and 

disbursement totals in comparison to the bank statements. 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 4 

 Added a "Check for Problems" system into the PACSmart software. The system applies an 

array of tests, including a check that expenses are included, a warning if expenses are not 

included in the FEC report, a check that donations and deposits are uploaded into the report, 

checks for common and/or problematic descriptions for disbursements, checks for records 

missing addresses and/or names, and other common reporting issues. 

 Integrated the FEC's "Validation Tool” to review the report to detect issues such as missing 

treasurer signature, missing name/address/employer/occupation, or other common 

reporting issues. 

 Implemented a filename/upload tracking system to review the names/data for particular 

files that have been uploaded. This tool ensures that the reporting team has properly 

uploaded expenses to the report. 

 Implemented a "Checklist" system to track the steps by the reporting team to prepare the 

FEC filing, who performed the task, and any relevant notes related to each step. The 

checklist includes a detailed breakdown and instructions to file the report. 

Finding 2 – Recordkeeping for Disbursements and Use of Designated Depository – 11 C.F.R. 

§104.14 and 52 U.S.C. §30102(d) and (h) 

A. Recordkeeping for Disbursements 

The Audit staff reviewed 159 payments totaling $2,240,253 that AERF disclosed to 

vendors. According to AERF’s bank statements, however, AERF made 66 wire transfers totaling 

$2,240,253 to “Er Responders.” This appears to be the Association for Emergency Responders 

and Firefighters, LLC. AERF reported the disbursements as payments to vendors other than “Er 

Responders” on its disclosure reports but did not provide “Er Responders” bank statements to 

demonstrate that the funds transferred from AERF to “Er Responders” were used to pay the 

vendors disclosed on the reports. As a result, the Audit staff was unable to verify the accuracy and 

completeness of the reported activity. 

The Audit staff discussed this matter with AERF representatives during the exit conference 

and provided relevant schedules. In response to the exit conference, AERF denied it violated the 

applicable regulations and stated that it properly disclosed disbursements to its vendors. 

According to AERF: 

• The vendors’ statements presented in response to the exit conference

 demonstrate payment from AERF “to all vendors throughout all of 2018.” 

• Three vendors changed their names and addresses in August 2018 but “the

 payments from AERF to the vendors from August 2018 through December

 2018 correlate to the vendor’s invoice number.” 

• AERF stated it made a single ACH wire transfer to pay for all three vendors, as 

opposed to three separate wire transfers, “because the single wire was a more 

4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 5 

 cost effective and efficient way to transfer funds.” To support this assertion, 

AERF submitted an attachment detailing the invoices and payment amounts for

 three vendors. 

• Lastly, AERF stated that it “object[s] to each of the findings that state AERF

 LLC was the payee of certain disbursements; these payments were properly 

 made to the vendors as payees.” 

In the Interim Audit Report, the Audit staff maintained that: 

• AERF did not provide sufficient and verifiable records to demonstrate that the 

 vendors disclosed on the reports were paid by way of the disbursements

 discussed in this finding. AERF’s bank statements indicate that the recipient of

 the wire transfers was a single entity titled “Er Responders.” This entity appears

 to be the Association for Emergency Responders and Firefighters, LLC. AERF

 only provided vendor statements to support that all billed amounts presented 

 were paid. AERF provided no verifiable documentation to demonstrate whether

 “Er Responders” subsequently made the payments to the disclosed vendors. 

• Changes to the new names and addresses of vendors should have been reflected

 in AERF’s disclosure reports. Unless such changes are disclosed, the public 

record is not accurate. 

• The Association for Emergency Responders and Firefighters, LLC registered 

 with the Nevada Secretary of State on November 20, 2017, 16 months after

 AERF registered with the Commission. In addition, while the Nevada Secretary 

of State discloses the LLC’s current status as “Revoked, ” AERF’s Treasurer,

 was listed as one of the managers of the LLC, along with two family members

 and, according to the public record, this entity was formed as a domestic limited 

 liability company. 

On August 12, 2021, AERF provided a Response to the Interim Audit Report. On January 

11, 2022, the Audit staff provided its Draft Final Audit Report. As it relates to Finding 2(A), the 

Audit staff recommends that AERF provide sufficient supporting and verifiable evidence to 

demonstrate that the 66 ACH transfers resulted in the 159 vendor payments AERF reported on its 

disclosure reports. Since it appears that AERF initiated the ACH transfers using its banking 

institution’s online banking portal, AERF can provide, for example, a debit memorandum or any 

similar electronic transaction receipt generated during the process for each ACH transfer. The 

Audit staff further recommends that, in addition to the aforementioned transfer documentation, 

AERF may also provide a written explanation from a bank official regarding how the transactions 

appear on its monthly bank statements and exactly how the funds were transferred. 

5 
 

 

 

 

 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 6 

B. Use of the Designated Depository 

The Audit staff identified 159 payments totaling $2,240,253 disclosed as payments to 

vendors which, according to AERF bank statements, were instead wire transfers to “Er 

Responders.” It appears AERF involved this entity in its financial operations and failed to use its 

designated depository to make payments directly to its vendors. AERF provided vendor statements 

to support that all billed amounts presented were paid to the vendors, however, the Audit staff was 

unable to verify that the funds AERF transferred to “Er Responders” were subsequently 

transmitted to AERF’s disclosed vendors. 

The Audit staff discussed this matter with AERF representatives during the exit conference. 

In its written response to the exit conference, AERF did not address AERF’s failure to use its 

designated depository to make payments to its vendors. 

In the Interim Audit Report, the Audit staff recommended that AERF provide bank 

statements to support that the disclosed vendors were paid with the funds transferred from AERF’s 

bank account to “Er Responders” with the description of “ACH Settlement Vendor Pay Er 

Responders.” The Interim Audit Report further recommended that AERF explain why its 

designated depository was apparently not used to make the direct payments to the disclosed 

vendors. 

In AERF’s Response to the Interim Audit Report, AERF disagreed with the Audit staff’s 

conclusion and maintained that the ACH transfers were made from its designated depository, as 

discussed in Part A above. The Audit staff maintains that AERF did not provide sufficient 

supporting and verifiable evidence to support that the disclosed vendors were paid with the funds 

transferred from the AERF’s bank account. 

The Audit staff recommends AERF provide sufficient supporting and verifiable evidence, 

such as debit memorandum or similar electronic receipt for each payment to demonstrate 

that the 66 ACH transfers initiated by AERF resulted in the 159 vendor payments reported on its 

disclosure reports. 

A. Response 

While AERF acknowledges the existence of the Association for Emergency Responders 

and Firefighters, LLC, it denies that this company was the payee of any ACH wire transfers from 

AERF. During the period in question, for each of the ACH wire transfers made from AERF’s 

designated depository with the stated vendors as intended recipients, PNC labeled the transfers 

“ACH Settlement Vendor Pay Er Responders.” However, this label was created solely by the PNC, 

and does not reflect payment to the Association for Emergency Responders and Firefighters, LLC, 

nor to any entity or entities other than the intended vendors. Although the FEC requested that 

AERF provide a statement from a bank official to explain the labeling of transactions, AERF was 

6 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 7 

unable to do so given the January 31st deadline. On January 26, 2022, AERF requested an 

extension of the deadline to respond so that it could obtain any information available, including 

such a statement, but the FEC denied that written extension request. 

The labeling of the wire transfers occurred as part of the process by which funds were 

transferred directly from AERF’s designated depository to the vendors in question. For each 

payment to a vendor, only one transfer occurred—the payment from AERF to the vendor, though 

it may have appeared that two transfers were being made—one from AERF’s designated 

depository to “Er Responders” (or, as the Audit staff has baselessly claimed, the LLC) and one 

from “Er Responders” to each of the vendors—because of the bank’s internal recordkeeping 

practice. Because this labeling process is controlled by the bank, AERF’s ability to more clearly 

demonstrate the direct flow of funds from its designated depository to the vendors is limited. 

Nonetheless, AERF produced Exhibit A to its Response to the Interim Audit Report which 

included statements of payments from AERF to vendors throughout 2018. And, in addition, AERF 

produced with that response a sharefile link that included redacted bank statements provided by 

the vendors to whom AERF wired the payments. These bank statements further bolstered and 

evidenced AERF’s contention that the wire transfers in question went from AERF to the 

corresponding vendors. 

Regarding the Audit staff’s request for verifiable evidence, AERF has obtained and 

produced contemporaneous with this Response the following: 

• Un-Redacted Financial Statements from November and December for all three 

vendors from the Nevada State bank, including the recipient’s name, bank account 

number, and the amount transferred; 

• Un-Redacted Financial Statements from January 2018 to August 2018 for all three 

vendors from PNC, including the recipient’s name, bank account number, and the 

amount transferred; 

• Un-Redacted Financial Statements that reflecting payments from TPFE Inc. prior 

to the vendor switch, including the recipient’s name, bank account number, and 

the amount transferred; 

• Un-Redacted Financial Statements reflecting payments from American Tech from 

Bank of America, including the recipient’s name, bank account number, and the 

amount transferred; 

•

• 2018 AERF Quickbooks accounting statements describing specific payment 

transactions, including the date of each transaction, the amount of each transaction, 

Quickbooks Report verifying AERF’s payment transaction to “ER 

RESPONDERS”—the report has the same invoice identification code 

as the bank statement reflecting the payment transaction to “ER 

RESPONDERS”; and 

7 
 

 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 8 

and AERF’s total balance after those transactions took place—below is a list of the 

vendors included in these particular accounting statements: 

o American PCI Services 

o American Technology Services 

o Cloud Data Services 

o Compliance Consultants LLC 

o Unified Data Services LLC 

o Unlimited Tech Support 

The financial statements listed above establish that AERF did in fact make the 

disbursements from its bank account directly to its vendors’ bank accounts. 

Furthermore, AERF objects to the Audit staff’s continued unsupported contention that the 

wire transfers in question went to the Association for Emergency Responders and Firefighters, 

LLC. Although the Audit staff concludes that this is the case, it has not provided any factual 

evidence or rationale to demonstrate how it has determined that the wire transfers were sent to the 

LLC. Rather, it appears the Audit staff has simply decided that the wire transfer must have gone 

the LLC because the transaction on the bank statement includes the “Er Responders” language. 

The Audit staff has not demonstrated any actual link between the wire transfer and the LLC, other 

than the mere existence of the LLC. In contrast, AERF has continuously provided evidence to 

verify its position, including bank statements and vendor payment receipts from the vendors. 

The bank statements show that the ACH transfers were completed typically within 24–48 

hours. Simply put, if the LLC or any third party had received the ACH funds and then sent the 

ACH funds to the vendors, the transactions would have taken longer than 24–48 hour period. The 

vendors received payments the day or two after the ACH was initiated, and if there was a 

middleman or third party, the transfer would not have occurred as fast as it did. 

On the basis of the foregoing, as well as the additional information and documentation 

provided along with this Response and to the Response the Interim Audit Report, the Audit 

Division should withdraw its finding related to recordkeeping for disbursements and use of 

designated depository. 

B. Implementation of Process and Improvements 

Upon AERF’s request, EWH no longer sends single transfers comprised of funds directed 

to multiple vendors, and instead makes separate transfers for each vendor. 

8 
 

Federal Election Commission, Audit Division 

January 31, 2022 

Page 9 

Please reach out with any questions. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Mark M. Lee 

Encs. 

Mark M. Lee Esq. 

cc: Zuzana O. Pacious, CFE (via e-mail) 

Gregory S. Bergman, Esquire (via e-mail) 

9