Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Politics

Finery may carry price for Hillsborough official

An elections board says spending campaign cash on suits is probably a violation.

By JEFF TESTERMAN
Published March 6, 2007

TAMPA - During his race for the Hillsborough County Commission last year, Kevin White used campaign money to buy himself $6,100 worth of imported Italian suits, tailored slacks, dress shirts and stylish ties.

Now, thanks to a state elections investigation, the cost of that wardrobe may rise dramatically.

White faces up to $38,047 in fines after a Florida Elections Commission finding of probable cause that he committed 14 violations of state election law. The FEC voted 7-0 at its February meeting to adopt the staff recommendation involving White, a former Tampa police officer and City Council member elected to the County Commission in November.

Most of the violations pertain to White's use of $6,100 in campaign funds to buy the $500 suits, $125-a-pair slacks and other clothes while disguising the prohibited expenditures as payments to Robbins Consulting, a phantom company with no address, phone number, occupational license or corporate listing.

The money was paid to Robert U. Robins who spells his name with just one b, the owner of Belmont Clothier at 2903 E Hillsborough Ave. White wrote on his campaign reports that the money was not for clothes but "consulting," and said Robbins Consulting was at Robins' home at 4206 N 29th St., a property owned by a relative with a different last name.

The FEC action was sparked by a St. Petersburg Times story disclosing White's wardrobe purchases in August. Tampa resident Lawrence R. Schuler clipped the story and mailed it with a complaint to the FEC, the state agency that investigates election violations.

"It's very clear that this guy doesn't want to be upfront with people," said Schuler, a retired U.S. Air Force master sergeant formerly with a nonprofit housing agency. "If you gave him a $500 campaign contribution, he didn't use it to buy yard signs. He was wearing it."

White did not return phone calls seeking comments on the FEC ruling Monday.

According the FEC report, White told an investigator that Robins considered himself to be White's "wardrobe consultant," and brought sample clothing to White's home "or wherever I needed him to meet and consult with me during business or non-business hours."

White told the investigator he did not have Robins' store address, so he just used the clothier's home address on campaign reports and continued using that residential address without "giving it a second thought."

The wardrobe purchases were used strictly for campaign purposes, White said, adding that if Schuler had asked him, "I would have told him that I was planning to donate the clothes to a local charity in November 2006, once the campaign was over."

White never mentioned that charity plan when the Times first queried him about the purchases last year. Instead, the day after the story revealed the purchases, White used $6,100 of his own money to reimburse his campaign account for the wardrobe.

White later told the FEC investigator that because he had written that personal check to his campaign account, "he now considers the clothes to be his," the report says.

The FEC found probable cause that White committed:

- Eight election law violations by certifying that campaign reports were correct when they were false, incomplete or inaccurate.

- Four violations by using campaign money improperly to defray normal living expenses with the wardrobe purchases and the purchase of a $1,915 Dell computer.

- Two violations by authorizing expenditures prohibited by election law: the $6,100 paid for the clothes and the $1,915 paid for the computer.

White said he needed the computer to file campaign data electronically with the supervisor of elections office, but he did not buy it until last April, about a year into his commission campaign.

White faces a maximum $1,000 fine on each of the 14 violations, as well as a civil penalty equivalent to triple the amount expended for the clothes and computer, for a maximum fine of $38,047.

FEC general counsel Charles A. Finkel said Monday that White had not responded to the charges, which can be handled three ways: He can dispute the FEC findings and request a formal administrative hearing; he can request an informal hearing before the FEC if there is no dispute about the findings; he can negotiate a penalty with FEC attorneys.

Schuler, who filed the complaint, said he had no clue what option White might take. "Whatever he does," said Schuler, "I'm sure he'll look like a million bucks."

Jeff Testerman can be reached at testerman@sptimes.com or (813) 226-3422.

[Last modified March 5, 2007, 22:29:02]