Grand Junction Rep. Steve King says he borrowed money from his campaign to rent a car so he could drive to the Capitol for a few weeks during the 2009 legislative session. And yes, the Republican lawmaker asked the state to reimburse him for the rental his campaign had already paid for.
But what critics – who filed a complaint that launched an ethics probe Wednesday – have missed is that King used the reimbursement from the state to repay his campaign account, the representative said.
One Republican on the ethics panel characterized it as “a payday loan from the campaign account.”
It’s unclear whether that series of transactions violates ethics rules or whether they run afoul of campaign finance regulations.
And some of the figures – what King borrowed from the campaign, what he charged the state and what he repaid the campaign – don’t yet add up.
King, a police investigator, said Wednesday he was strapped for cash when his 2005 Chevy broke down last spring and he couldn’t wait for the state to reimburse him for rental costs.
“Unless I’ve got the cash, how else am I supposed to pay for a car to get to Denver?” King asked. “I don’t know if it’s the right way to do it, but the most functional.”
The committee is seeking more information on how and when King incurred the expenses. They meet again Feb. 12 to decide whether King “double dipped” and must have a decision by Feb. 18.
But the fact that King repaid his campaign account for its share of the rental costs long before political watchdog group Ethics Watch filed their complaint seemed to sway some of the committee members.
“He had car problems and doesn’t have the money to rent a car,” said Republican Rep. Mark Waller of Colorado Springs. Waller coined the “payday loan” analogy. “He says, ‘Let me borrow from my campaign account. I have to pay as I rent it, and I’m not going to get mileage reimbursement back from the state (immediately).'”
But not every panelist was convinced. Most outspoken in his disagreement was Greeley Democrat Rep. Jim Riesberg.
“I can’t imagine borrowing money from my campaign and paying it back,” Riesberg said. “You have auto expenses, you pay for them.”
It’s also unclear how King decided what to charge the state for his 508-mile round trips to and from the Capitol for the weeks his car was in the shop.
The state either pays 45 cents a mile for lawmakers driving their vehicles or pays rental costs and gas. Not both.
King’s campaign paid $575 for three weeks in March and $214 for a week in April to rent a car for King, records including Thrifty receipts show.
But King charged the state for $1,620 in car rental expenses in March and $315 in April for a combined five weeks of rental travel. Lawmakers renting a vehicle do not have to provide receipts for reimbursement.
King said without his records in hand, he could not explain why the amount he charged the state is more than $1,000 higher than what he charged his campaign.
In April and May, King took reimbursement money from the state and repaid his campaign a total of $1,025, records show. That’s more than what the campaign spent on rental fees.
Luis Toro, director of Colorado Ethics Watch, said he’s waiting to see what other information King provides the ethics panel. His group also suspects that hundreds of dollars in gas paid for by King’s campaign was also paid for by the state.
King said in a written response to the legislative ethics panel that the allegation is erroneous.
But even if that’s not true and even if what looked like double dipping turns out to be short-term loan, Toro said it’s a misuse of campaign funds.
“I don’t think it’s appropriate to use your campaign fund to give yourself an advance,” Toro said. “If you or me had car problems and had to put it on a credit card, we’d be paying 18 percent interest.”
Jessica Fender: 303-954-1244 or jfender@denverpost.com.
