BY SANDY THEIS
The Cincinnati Enquirer
COLUMBUS - Gov. George Voinovich asked the Ohio Elections Commission Friday to reject Democrats' efforts to join a case that accuses the Republican governor of approving an illegal scheme to launder money from his campaign to his brother and a statehouse lobbyist.
The governor's action does not address a companion complaint - filed by Secretary of State and governor-elect Bob Taft - that is based on identical information.
Instead, Mr. Voinovich asked the panel just to dismiss a complaint, filed Thursday by Harold Nichols, head of the Trumbull County AFL-CIO.
Mr. Nichols wants the bi-partisan panel to consolidate the two complaints and hire an "investigatory attorney" who would act much like a special prosecutor.
If the panel allows Mr. Nichols to proceed, Democrats would gain a strategic advantage in the high-profile case. Their lawyer would not only be permitted to take sworn statements from the governor and other parties, he also would be involved in presenting the case against the governor to the commission.
Under Ohio election law, the panel hears cases from people with "personal knowledge" of possible violations.
Mr. Nichols' complaint contends he has such knowledge because he read grand jury transcripts and other information attatched to the original complaint.
"Even a cursory reading of the complaint reveals that Mr. Nichols has no personal knowledge of the events alleged," the governor argues in his motion to dismiss.
Don McTigue, who is Mr. Nichols' attorney, disagrees.
"The commission's policy has always been to treat someone as having personal knowledge if they have personally reviewed documents that are attached to their complaint," Mr. McTigue said.
He noted that the panel recently allowed Ohio Republican Party Chairman Bob Bennett to proceed with a complaint against Democrats based on information Mr. Bennett read in newspapers.
"If reading newspaper stories is enough, so is this," Mr. McTigue said.
Both the original complaint and Mr. Nichols' center on allegations that Mr. Voinovich; his brother, Paul; and officials from Paul Voinovich's architectural firm took part in a scheme to disguise payments from Gov. Voinovich's 1994 re-election committee.
Mr. Voinovich and his brother have denied they knowingly broke any laws.
The two are under investigation for allegedly misrepresenting the nature of a $60,000 expenditure made by the Voinovich for Governor Committee.
The misrepresentation centers on money allegedly paid to a third party for the purpose of reimbursing Paul Voinovich for payments he made to Anthony "Ray" Gallagher for work on George Voinovich's 1994 re-election campaign.
