By PAT NEWMAN
Staff Writer

The State Ethics Commission voted 3-0 Monday to dismiss a complaint filed against the Fayette County Board of Education regarding a perceived donation to a political action committee supporting passage of the special purpose local option sales tax.

“They dismissed the complaint, the way I understand it,” said Dr. John DeCotis, Fayette County school superintendent. “We felt like we followed the advice of our attorneys... and followed the ethics commission rulings... we are not in violation of anything.”

The complaint was filed by Claude Paquin of Fayetteville. It stated that the board indirectly contributed to the PAC called Fayette Citizens for Continued Excellence in Education by allowing a representative from A.G. Edwards, one of the firms engaged to handle bond sales in conjunction with the sales tax, to act as advisor to the PAC. If the SPLOST had passed, the firm would have benefitted financially from the sale of bonds.

Ethics Commission spokesmen were not available at press time to reveal their reasons for ruling the complaint invalid.

In a related matter, the commission determined that there is probable cause to further investigate a complaint filed by PAC Chairman Janet Smola against Carl Avrit of Fayetteville. Avrit opposed the SPLOST and launched a last-minute campaign to defeat the referendum via the telephone.

“My contention is that Mr. Avrit violated the Georgia Ethics in Government Act, Article 2, section 21-5-34,” said Smola. “That article states that all advertising pertaining to a referendum must be identified by the principle officer of the campaign committee by listing or stating the name and title of the principle officer,” Smola said. Telephone calls are viewed as advertizing, according to the commission, and the SPLOST was a referendum, not simply a one-ballot issue, as argued by Avrit's attorney Don Johnson.

The phone calls received by citizens did not identify their source and, according to Smola, contained erroneous information.

Two other complaints filed by Smola were dismissed. One of the two issues involved signs believed to be placed by Avrit opposing the SPLOST before he was officially registered as a PAC. The other involved the alleged failure to set up a separate campaign account to handle contributions.

Smola said she believes Avrit used subversive campaign tactics to defeat the SPLOST, which is “not fair to anybody.”