Democratic Party of Delaware

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D( 2 461

THIS IS THE BEGIMI1I OF ?IR #

DITE FILMED -7/2;Y cERANO. -AEAA iS -~ ~cri~f

October 19, 1994

$<~.* o

CUTIFID NAIL & Gel 2 28 BMW= RCIPT REOURSTED Office of General Counsel m)AR LA09iU Federal Election Commission 999 E Street, NW Washington, DC 20463

Dear Sir or Madam: Ln ;~ -4 Under the rights accorded in 2 U.S.C. S 437g(a)l, I hereby. file a complaint against the respondents listed for the follo g violations of the federal campaign finance laws: Violations: 1. Excessive Personal Contributions 2. Illegal Earmarked Contributions 3. Expenses benefiting a Candidate - Not reported Respondents: Attorney General Charles Oberly Oberly Senate Committee (C#00282517) 3409 Lancaster Pike Wilmington, DE 19805 Don Henley West Hollywood, CA 90069 Delaware Democratic State Party P.O. Box 2065 Wilmington, DE 19805

The Facts 1. On September 22, 1994 in the Delaware State News, it was reported that California rock star Don Henley had contributed $20,000 to the Delaware Democratic Party. [Taken by itself, there is nothing illegal about this contribution.] 2. The September 28, 1994 issue of The Wave reports that Charles Oberly says "rock star and former singer Don Henley contributed $100,000 to his campaign." (Copies of both articles are enclosed.) * 1 Office of the General Counsel 0 October 19, 1994 Page 2 It would appear that: a) If Don Henley did give $100,000 to the Oberly Senate Committee he has made an excessive campaign contribution. b) If Don Henley gave $100,000 to the Democratic State Party with the intention that it be spent on the Oberly Senate Committee it would be an earmarked contribution and subject to be counted against both contributor's limit and the party committee's limit for that candidate.

c) The state party is preparing to spend this money directly to benefit the Oberly Senate Committee. If spent on Charlie Oberly's behalf, it would not count as coordinated expenditures or party building activities. Thus it should be reported as an in-kind contribution. d) The Democratic State Party's federal committee may only accept contributions up to $5,000 from an individual. Thus, none of this money beyond the $5,000 would be available to spend on a federal campaign, since money contributed in excess of $5,000 would be deposited in the State Party's C\1 non-federal account (which under Delaware State law is allowed to accept corporate funds.) '110I request that you initiate immediate action against the respondents to investigate the appearance and possible violation 1-0 of campaign finance laws. W "Signed on the 19th day of October, Nineteen hundred and ninety-four, under the penalty of perjury and subject to the provisions of section 1001 of title 18, United States Code. Sincerely,

Dana DiSabatino Complainant' s Address: 2600 West 7th Street, Apt. G2 Wilmington, DE 19805

Notarized ____

Signed and sworn to before me. MARY E. AaTHEAM NOTARY PUBUC Date:/ / STATE OF DELAWARE Dt:' - COMM. EXPIRES SEP. 22, 1995 Oberly iero~W~xi7' On Senate Seat K: pe Webmi i1uw.11WVScmbO~CUlIe. a.1 Imeismed Ira. di. mu1ba~ mv,, - Ob~. empm~ - ~ w.k Obsily ha. mad. a. must i - pellalmal maSyass lee. ~ -. I.bv aw~ gujml pbussa.chm~WYVkTf dI~IlemI~mu.la.dheswM ouumuhad e.DshwmiwS ib swims. h.h~pud eintswebb~ aim hhi chilim Ma pamei. Six . h~. 11... oi~n I. fuuS.hIsmrnp~u mule. ambakmA.phinm-WEShSM hummu~ ~ - - Sb O sm.pus~ut w 3.. WU3.m Middle Cbs. Cauididule V. Rob ii. Wb him thin asses we~ b hi which busy praldeM Oesvp so balms Sb t~ysmbse luabm ~"m abul9i ,h.~effbkx*. PIflCT OWOCRATS pibered M the Resins Fire Hal to he. their cmnidutes - O~I~ bu uch - Darn SW. inoemminini.buiinselidy ~g sues SMvrdeyNl~it. Prom ~~Cosam&yc@Ui~ CoU~~niie candi Namby w puimmwa lass isowy -m ~mrles Ob~4 end U. GOv. Ann btlewsw C.rdre~r. ~ C4pm i Thhi Wob wEb amiuhil. *mwe.m.iinheib*iUWIk: t*,fthgh.~wO.bd.Wl7 DeCasslel (Aulae~ mood of is whim may is b. .1ow swAb by. -, urnS. by kawbidue.,' inI - Dinah Aba Deimamihi dus~p. si Us be. -. almiqisinbb AMIs,.~sOhulyhuhc~ad abut, Whys. mob u Ohio. Obsty. whs~irmAas.So1invmuli Ales Sbm uauaulvs burn - uihl. w~ hi I..mdrn~ Sm b.Sea~b hJmup~ Whim -u scud Nmdd.~ mibuk Dmbm - .woua.ygsinrsLabsdybinis- 3Isd~SWUbmd~ ~ b whimsy hi Dahiw... mys "Tb. mm Ilmlthtlcna Is a - ~- - rue.. * muM wary w~ dusasho -- sees ~.dSbs.labulUU. Sb i2~ymr mm N.h isis iarnap1m~aObarty 'If y misSy moo a mlsusahs, 8S~ ~ md~aiiny. Sblr I~ulsa. Is hi a Idea,, wait to rum etas ~e1O, ahe f~g?*rn~ Cisily ~s wbeg.dm.bu thinly 54g- bauis Sums whoa ysa NOisily ml., bmW is Sb bum b. 3.idywlm. And I bmw - 92~" b~astp~si qM W e.m'~ a kmdM agasaic pichie ~ lbs ~e3m 3~biSs aWbu~hi~iUaIiSlU1h~ _ mm baa bp4Umm I. Caish lowS. aWe..' aliaS of tbs .iiks U.S. * ~ - ~ (*uWs own poll gp~ usybcmmmqssta~ is W~ arAb ~ higuaily alms- ~' mis Obuily. wbbmWbUs~E.. b~Audwd.mlss.UpoObutV.4* mu mm. ~y.uboluu mid dmi~ ww .. ,~abeid. ~ - -S - ba my-tm * mum -rn-v lq.?whmmbm.Umy tern.' irna'.HW .inbmsewe.Wm bib Wib mud qwh - r.~iet W.eai~bwsk beds DsmsraIls Sm. Sbert 3.MI Sb~Saa~sh.~ bra -* - (Ohio) amSi.e. 'umol m6 emmashmam hi Abs Semis *tunbaum A.mpsOhuly.ie jul 4 samiuag WIhOmebimI - ~, w~his Sue myme Don Henlewy gwvs Dems

OOYER A cdal"a~ rock stw bw tie aftm Dam- cs an Commue a $20000

SDm Binlq - fogurdrm =ff. wee"wwt ad ouffiw

be~z AW. 2 sAV& Spt. 2

Slw. fag* puWrs m repe- I= Ren3ft et;Lm Aa Hescc wm fau 5.alhssWSSou ermd obe mLbWft amst - apw4- wri haftosw.aw o(ff Hd*q. ame Rammusn oat bStt Detwo I"a Cbsaw nun Qft I o a.G

wrm IoIpo~ad coi nEe soft fa n~I sP"otan grt 1Lohevt -A dot FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

October 28, 1994

Dana DiSabatino 2600 West 7th Street, Apt. G2 Wilmington, DE 19805

RE: HMR 4096

Dear Hs. DiSabatino:

This letter acknowledges receipt on October 21, 1994, of your complaint alleging possible violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended ('the Act'). The respondent(s) will be notified of this complaint within five .Ndays.

You will be notified as soon as the Federal Election Commission takes final action on your complaint. Should you receive any additional information in this matter, please forward it to the Office of the General Counsel. Such information must be sworn to in the same manner as the original \0 complaint. We have numbered this matter UR 4096. Please refer to this number in all future communications. For your information, we have attached a brief description of the Comissionts procedures for handling complaints. Sincerely,

§ary L. Attorney - Central Enforcement Docket

Enclosure Procedures FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WAsHINConTO,)4 Q(

October 28, 1994

Charles x. Oberly III 3409 Lancaster Pike Wilmington, DR 19805

Rt XUR 4096

Dear Mr. Oberly:

The Federal Election Commission received a complaint which indicates that you may have violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended ('the Act'). A copy of the complaint is enclosed. We have numbered this matter Ul 4096. Please refer to this number in all future correspondence. Under the Act, you have the opportunity to demonstrate in writing that no action should be taken against you in this matter. Please submit any factual or legal materials which you believe are relevant to the Commission's analysis of this matter. Where appropriate, statements should be submitted under oath. Your response, which should be addressed to the General Counsel's Office, must be submitted within 1S days of receipt of this letter. If no response is received within IS days, the Commission may take further action based on the available information.

This matter will remain confidential in accordance with 2 U.S.C. I 437g(a)(4)(5) and S 437g(a)(12)(A) unless you notify the Commission in writing that you wish the matter to be made public. if you intend to be represented by counsel in this matter, please advise the Commission by completing the enclosed form stating the name, address and telephone number of such counsel, and authorizing such counsel to receive any notifications and other communications from the Commission. If (202) you have any questions, please contact Alva x. Smith at 2lw 3400. rt your information, we have enclosed description a brief of the Commissionts procedures for handling complaints.

Sincerely,

Mary L.Taksarr Attorne* Central Enforcement Doc et Enclosures 1. Complaint 2. Procedures 3. Designation of Counsel Statement CN FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHIN(.TON. DC 2O*bi

October 28, 1994 John D. Oberly, Treasurer Oberly Senate Committee 3409 Lancaster Pike Wilmington, DR 19805

Ra: MUR 4096

Dear Mr. Oberly:

The Federal Election Commission received a complaint which indicates that the Oberly Senate Committee ('Committee') and you, as treasurer, may have violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended ('the Act'). A aopy of the C i complaint is enclosed. We have numbered this matter UE 4096. Please refer to this number in all future correspondence.

Under the Act, you have 0) the opportunity to demonstrate in writing that no action should be taken against the Committee and you, as treasurer, in this matter. Please submit any factual or gal materials which you believe are relevant to the Commission's analysis of this matter. Where appropriate, statements should be submitted under oath. Your response, which should be addressed to the General Counsel's Office, must be submitted within IS days of receipt of this letter. If no response is received within 1S days, the Commission may take further action based on the available information.

This matter will remain confidential in accordance with 2 U.S.C. I 437g(a)(4)(9) and I 437g(a)(12)(A) unless you notify the Commission in writing that you wish the matter to be made public. If you intend to be represented by counsel in this matter, please advise the Commission by completing the enclosed form stating the name, address and telephone number of such counsel, and authorizing such counsel to receive any notifications and other communications from the Commission. If you have any questions, please contact Alva 3. Smith at (202) 219-3400. For your information, we have enclosed a brief description of the Commission's procedures for handling complaints. Sincerely,

Mary L sar, Attorney Central Enforcement Docket Enclosures 1. Complaint 2. Procedures 3. Designation of Counsel Statement FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASFINCTON OC 20464

Don~ Henley October 28, 1994 14100 Hulholland Drive 3everly Hills, CA 90210

RE: HUR 4096

Dear Mr. Henley: The Federal Election Commission received a complaint which indicates that you may have violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 as amended ('the Act'). A copy of the complaint is enclosed. We have numbered this matter NUl 4096. Please refer to this number in all future correspondence. Under the Act, you have the opportunity to demonstrate in writing that no action should be taken against you in this matter. Please submit any factual or legal materials which you 'believe are relevant to the Coamission's analysis of this matter. Where appropriate, statements should be submitted under oath. Your response, which should be addressed to the General Counsel's Office, must be submitted within 15 days of receipt of this letter. If no response is received within 15 days, the Commission may take further action based on the available information. This matter will remain confidential in accordance with 2 U.S.C. 5 4379(a)(4)(S) and S 4379(a)(12)(A) unless you notify the Commission in writing that you wish the matter to be made public. If you intend to be represented by counsel in this matter, please advise the Commission by completing the enclosed form stating the name, address and telephone number of such counsel, and authorizing such counsel to receive any notifications and other communications from the Commission. If you have any questions, pleas* contact Alva 3. Smith at (202) 210-3400. For your information, we have enclosed a brief description of the Commissionts procedures for handling complaints. Sincerely,

Mary L. Yksar, Attorney Central Enforcement Docket anclosures 1. Complaint 2. Procedures 3. Designation of Counsel Statenent FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGTON, 0C V")b

October 28, 1994 H. Thomas Eannagan, Treasurer Democratic State Committee Delaware P.O. Box 2065 Wilmington, DR 19899

RE: IUR 4096

Dear Mr. Hannagan: The Federal Election Commission received a complaint which Cindicates that Democratic State Committee Delaware ("Committee") and you, as treasurer, may have violated the Federal ulection Campaign Act of 1971, as amended ('tho Act*). A copy of the Ncomplaint is enclosed. We have numbered this matter Mm 4096. Please refer to this number in all future correspondence. Under the Act, you have the opportunity to demonstrate in writing that no action should be taken against the Committee and you, as treasurer, in this matter. Please submit any factual or legal materials which you believe are relevant to the Commissionts analysis of this matter. Where appropriate, statements should be submitted under oath. Your response, which should be addressed to the General Counseles Office, must be submitted within IS days of receipt of this letter. If no response is received within IS days# the Commission may take further action based on the available information. This matter will remain confidential in accordance with 2 U.S.C. I 437g(a)(4)(9) and S 437g(a)(12)(A) unless you notify the Commission in writing that you wish the matter to be made public. If you intend to be represented by counsel in this matter, please advise the Commission by completing the enclosed form stating the name, address and telephone number of such counsel, and authorizing such counsel to receive any notifications and other communications from the Commission. If you have any questions, please contact Alva X. Smith at (202) 219-3400. for your Information, d4e*ription we have enclosed a brief of the Comissionts procedures for handling complaints.

Sincerely,

Mary L. Tkear, Attorney Central Enforcement Docket Enclosures 1. Complaint N. 2. Procedures 3. Designation of Counsel Statement MMIIW,715,

MANA'T, PULs & A PA14 TiPW nSIlUMM 1M00Tohi ArTON14"Y AT LAW 61 Iq 5 23 UI 'A

PND . TUFOVUC 1 is$w OLYC !OSAEA 1001 M 0?T W.W. us 700 V&A00$TCN.TaPHONE 0,4834O3-00D.C. 200M 1 02 010)3114340Sa MO04-1614 LOG ANGEM. MPIM 4*4S430 m a ms" t.3it4 P lt.312433

33 MuIc tMA WM. VA 1004 MM"8 0110189 3720"32* NvemOl 8, 1994 TS.4WOW 016) M040" PAX WIN 2W 112M

By -aGO-!Na aad U.S. Mail

* .t- - Alva Smith ,,,,--L. Federal Election Commission 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20463

Re: MUR ,M - Don Henley

Dear Ms. Smith:

Pursuant to your -acios, I am faxing to you a copy of the signed stat ment Of degatio ofw in the Aoe miar. You sted that the faxed copy is sufficient, and tha I could eep te oiginal. Acodiigly, I am epn the origa.

Thank you fbr your coopmbon.al

Very truly yows,

Ronald B. Tuvaky Manatt, Phelps & Phillips RBT:pes Enclosure cc: L. Lee Phillips, Esq. J1/0~', M1341 FAX mie l401Boe OAD TOURWNG Cfj SiNT all .I)- I-it ;1VIONP 4 FCT 510 ~54 SORES )

_rff ---JF---"T7 .- I,i . a., q - i ; I

mmaa CAJ.SQC6I14. 1501*4L tzo. *.e, Us~t 700 AMLL -342-4241L 53~d R&ShJUtSLO& VS. 30005-1701

""laLoga EM~ an Caatea n &M4 t& ict ag MW00&g( bstg doe mouss4*ll

- 4 , ;r glo"Uti- 10007 U7. ft$ -,ID,

C11. 5%) If"4

sham .9.~ cQ 1423 now~ I

U I 0 10 MANAT, PHELPS & PH S A POMTWN OMMuOM pu0SL (ON TSM ATTOWdEYS AT LAW

nOwLD a. TU3AVlKY 1135 ""ST OLtyMqc SOULEVARO Uo1 1=1 N.W.. IuT 100 Wi N, D.C. 200M I ?OR ODIRCT OIM W310)3114*0 LOS ANGRlS. C 50064-1414 TO.0UK OM 312400 PAX GM 484 Pam 46342 oo

asamswM UlII TOO WT 372"."U" 1064226~

Nvanbe 15, 1994 TamIm WIN 8aw-4

Dy Fwceik.U on Neamenr 15, 1994K amd : ri Dy Fenene Deauey en Nevra 16, 1,94

Alva Smith, Esq. Federal Election Commission 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20463

Re. MUR 40 - Dnm Heney

Dear Ms. Smith:

This will confirm our couwaution today, Nanber 15, 1994, in which you confirmed that our reqpm to the cmp wuld be timey by faxinl a copy of the roIponetoday and9 dive q the wia by pa , deliv feyto w office on November 16, 1994. If this is in any way inS-r me, pinase infom us immdiately.

Th1ank you for your r rre rabonC.-

Very truly yours,

Secmtary th'Ronald B. Turovsky Manatt, Phelps & Phillips :pesl Enclosure cc: L. Lee Phillips, Esq. "V7

MANAJTT Pls & PunzL PS A FIPOXGPW DiOSIMS M ONIMOM OMOI St% A TTOMW AT LAW

NOWtI.O 5. TrOV 118I5IWST OLYMPIC SOULEVARO feet~loIootMU 8yTMry W.w...VOIoo .atreW" 700 IS ONECT~ Itft324240 LOS ANflU. CA UPOWS -064-1614 iawwwm a 400 TIUIaew 010 e I P"alseolta. VIAM FAXOUM 404oW amm m WEST. sum t0" November 14, 1994 NAOINAL I IN -1 87203-U25 FAX 011M 2WI20

By Persnal Delivery

General Counsel's Office • " j Federal Election Commission 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20463

Re: MUR 4096 - Dan, Henley&J-

To Whom It May Concern:

This repos is a on behalf of Don Haley in conection with MUR 4096. Mr. Henley has not viaed the Fedmal lecto Cau Actof 1971, as amended, 2 U.S.C. 431 et. seq. (the "Act'). Te c iuimat commads that a newqmper has reported that Mr. Henley made a contrbution o $10, ad ht if dt were e would be a violation of the Act. Ta r ts an of this 'appearance and possible violation of c finace laws."

The simple answer is that, as shown in the atoicbed sworn smnts, the alleged 1,000 contribution was never de, and there is no possible violation of the Act. An inherently unreliable source - a neWspaper article - should not be sufficient to initiate an investigation, particularly given the sworn statements contradicting the unverified newspaper report. The Federal Election Commi-sion (the 'Commission') should find no reason to believe that Mr. Henley violated the Act. No action shmld be takn and the matter should be dismissed.

I. Factual Background

The factual background is simple. On or about August 30, 1994, Mr. Henley contributed $20,000 to 'Victory '94,' which is a state committee, not a federal committee, registered in Delaware and formed by the Democratic Party of Delaware. Declaration of Don Henley at 3; Declaration of Lester Kaufman at 14. The check signed by Mr. Henley states 'Contribution to State Account.' Id. This was Mr. Henley's only contribution to any committee associated with the Democratic Party of Delaware. Id. Mr. Henley did not earmark or designate the contribution to the Oberly Senate Campaign. Declaration of Don MAI4ATr, PMZLJPS & PnuPs

Genal Cousl's Office November 14, 1994 Pagp 2

Henley at 13. He did not contribute $100,000 to the Democratic Party of Delaware. Dechrmtio of Don Henley at 13; Declaration of Lester Kaufman at 14. Likewise, Mr. Henley has not contributed $100,000 to the Oberly Senate Committee. Declaration of Don Henley at 12; Declaration of Lester Kaufman at 13. In fact, Mr. Henley has made no contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee. id. On or about September 28, 1994, a newspaper falsely reported that Mr. Henley contributed $100,000 to the Oberly Senate Committee. Specifically, the article states that Delaware Attorney General Charles Oberly allegedly told the reporter that he received a $100,000 contribution from Mr. Henley. That report is erroneous. Declaration of Don Henley at 4.

Based upon that erroneous newspaper report, a complaint was filed against Mr. Henley, the Democratic Party of Delaware, and the Oberly Senate Committee. The complaint relies exclusively on the newspe article, and asserts that, if the article is indeed correct, Mr. Henley would have made a contribution in excess of the maximum and the Oberly Senate Committee would have received a contribution in excess of the maximum. Altumtively, the complainant appears to be contending that, if Mr. Henley's purported co0nt, were made to the Democratic Party of Delaware, there could be a possible violation by Mr. Henley and the Democratic Party of Delaware. UI. Rtespomue

There is no merit to the complaint. The contribution upon which the complaint is based never was made. The basis of the complaint -- an unverified report in a newspaper article -- is inherently unreliable such that the complaint should be dismissed and the file closed.

The central factual allegation upon which the complaint is based is the erroneous contention that Mr. Henley made a $100,000 contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee. In fact, that contribution was never made. As stated in the declarations of Mr. Henley and Lester Kaufman, Mr. Henley's business manager, Mr. Henley did not contribute $100,000 either to the Oberly Senate Committee or to the Democratic Party of Delaware. Declaration of Don Henley at 112-3; Declaration of Lester Kaufman at 113-4. The only contribution made by Mr. Henley was a $20,000 contribution to Victory '94, a state committe formed by the Democratic Party of Delaware. Declaration of Don Henley at 3; Declaration of Lester Kaufman at 4. That contribution was nothing more than a lawful contribution to a state political committee. Even the complainant acknowledges that there is l0

NIANAIT PMiii & PHILLIPS

General Counsel's Office November 14, 1994 Pag 3

"nothing illegal about this contribution." To that extent, and to that extent only, the omplainant is correct. There is no basis for the allegation.

Indeed, the Commission should take no action under these circumstances. The complaint itself is equivocal. It is based on nothing more than an unverified newspaper account. A newspaper is obviously of limited evidentiary value and is inherently unreliable. The newspIper account in fact is double hearsay in that it relies on an alleged statement by Mr. Obefly, a statement that Mr. Oberly may or may not have made. On the other hand, Mr. Henley has provided two sworn statements that demonstrate that the central unsubstantiated allegation upon which the complaint is based is false. In light of the fact that the complaint is based solely on an unsubstantiated newspaper article and is itself equivocal, and the response is based upon two sworn statements demonstrating that the basis of the complaint is erroneous, there is no basis to proceed. The Commission should find no reason to believe that a possible violation has occurred and the file should be closed.

Eam. Co

The purported $100,000 contribution upon which the complaint is based never occurred. The newspaper account is incorrect. Given the unreliable nature of the "support' for the ae o in the complaint, and the sworn statements in response, no action should be taken and the matter should be dismissed.

Sincerely,

Ronald B. Turovsky Manatt, Phelps & Phillips 0 0

DECLARATION OF DON HENLEY

1, DON HENLEY, declare:

1. The following is true of my personal knowledge, except as to those matters stated on information and belief, and, as to those matters, I believe them to be true.

If sworn as a witness, I could and would competently testify as follows.

2. I have not contributed $100,000 to the Oberlv Senate Committee. in fact, I have made no contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee.

3. 1 have not contributed $100,000 to Delaware's state Democratic party organization, which I am informed and believe is called the "Democratic Party of Delaware," or to any committee associated with the Democratic Party of Delaware. On or about

August 30, 1994, 1 contributed $20,000 to "Victory '94," which I am informed and believe is a state committee registered in Delaware -- not a federal committee -- formed by the

Democratic Party of Delaware. The check states "Contribution to State Account." This was my only contribution to any committee associated with the Democratic Party of Delaware.

This contribution was not earmarked or designated by me to the Oberly Senate Campaign.

4. 1 have reviewed the allegations in the complaint, which state that I contributed $100,000 to the Oberly Senate Committee and/or to the "Delaware Democratic

State Party." That allegation is false and erroneous.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this l/ day of November, 1994.

DON1HENLE -' DON 1HENLEY DECLARATION OF LESTER KAUFMAN

1, LESTER KAUFMAN,, declare:

1. I have personad knowledge of the foregoing facts. If sworn as a

witness, I could and would competently testify as follows.

2. 1 am Don Henley's business manager. As part of my responsibilities,

and in the course and scope of my services as business manager, I write and sign checks for

Mr. Henley, including all political contributions. I also keep track of all checks written by

Mr. Henley directly.

3. 1 have reviewed Mr. Henley's records. Mr. Henley has not contributed

$100,000 to the Oberly Senate Committee. He has made no political contributions to the

-Oberly Senate Committee at least in 1994.

4. Mr. Henley has not contributed $100,000 to the Denmcratic Party of

Delaware. Mr. Henley wrote one check to Victory '94, a committee established by the

Democratic Party of Delaware. That check signifies that the money was contributed to the

state account. Thas was Mr. Henley's only contribution to the Democraic Party of

Delaware at least in 1994.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and

the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this jL.day of November, 1994. MANAT, P s & P PS A POMRWE UIN IMUH.O €MO4_ IWOS

ATTORNMEEY AT LAW

AONAD.o .runovuv 11356 WIEST OLYMC BOULEVARO 150 u SrMET Nw,. turn 700 vW%0ON. D.C. XXOM0 l DMCT DIAL 431o i-4240 LOS ANGELES. CA06-1A W004 1614 ei aw mot00-2 4300 vmwwM mu sgo0 FMX ia 212AM4 PAX 20at"43N

38 mum QUJ* IWS?. SuITE 1004 Decemnber 6, 1994 U lo 2WI PAX 30111 l2110

By Facsimile and U.S. Mail L, -

General Counsel's Office Federal Election Commission 999 E Street, N.W. - Washington. D.C. 20463

Re: MUR 4096 - Don Henley

To Whom It May Concern:

This letter is a 1ppleme to our November 14, 1994, resone submitted on behalf of Don Henley in conaection with MUR 4096. The comlait contends that a newspaper has stated that Mr. Honky made a contributim of $100,000 to a indhi who at the time was a candidate for the Unitd Sines Senate, and that, if this were true, there would be a violation of the Federal Election C i Act of 1971, as amend (the "Act.') In our response, we explained that, as shown in two sworn statements, the alleged $100,000 contribution was never made, that Mr. Henley simply contri $0,000 t1 a state party committee formed by the Democratic Party of Delaware, and that the newspaper was incorrect in its report.

Since that time, the newspaper itself has run a retraction, correcting its erroneous report. While the newspaper, The Wave, originally wrote, in its article on September 28, 1994, that "Oberly even says rock star and former Eagles singer Don Henley contributed $100,000 to his campaign,' the newspaper, under the heading "Getting it Straight," wrote on November 30, 1994, that "A story on U.S. Senate candidate Charles M. Oberly III which appeared in the Sept. 28 Wave contained a sentence that should have read 'Rock star and Eagles singer Don Henley contributed $20,000 to the state Democratic Party campaign chest.'" A copy of the retraction is enclosed.

The entire basis of the complaint was the unverified and inherently unreliable report in a newspaper article. The source of the statement has now withdrawn that statement. In light of this, as well as our November 14, 1994, response and the two sworn statements which establish that the newspaper report was incorrect, the Federal Election MANAITS Pon & Pinnal's General Counsel's Offie Decenbe- 6, 1994 Page 2

Commission shoud find no reason to believe that a possible violatm has occurred and the mater should be I imuidiely and the file dosed. Thank you for your coo .ta.

Sincerely,

Ronald B. Turovsky Manatt, Phelps & Phillips RBT:pes, Enclosure New Long Neck School Will Ease EMES Problems

S)Rbe IsVS Ole40001 l V~tr W va VO'(4W4WGU regts ,. -ra.~ zjmaj r tw,1of ft *~ Lg 'at -'ars~wvbueehdTeo~.n fLs 4~ OPEN GYM kitt S"Qsee . irlpe ne . Mla ae eateneadee *# Ehe~tv vii lftba*s Um*%e Syaw__ vi- Vt6%*^- ** 4*dA"LftMr o e "be§USMS4eAIV b~w ffpaizese. Lord Baltitnore. P% I qw eq& ft abI~ " d, 0411Q b -W0 9W *K~Rv to-1 aw NO% U%6 am( UW fbew ~Qe4mElemntary11uisa l tft t & School r U*mfv am.~~o Oa*" M"e 'Oft4"Mi %V~~0400 Of 60TWRweif Euuu. Every Friday Nite ead a% .0 At %0&%$ M %ahaio- itaf0i4C~ sheelu. a kiwiy $UK of AC "Mfe 1.M0 uIN- 014 heIW MaS a ilw WSi. O"aid %oni"UG "aUIbi iuw- 9 *tw.enC3 wsdyamleg. la" 00fe ad veiwutw Ch'C ely Wfak *thAsiMV ~ IMlltboe .wB eseuin ie ow m4U"M bo WbeV we *wvWtac "0~W femly. asmy FV e exi. -"p.*V %sw-sbw bo 'I II "M solve b~ex.~'.'C fe"01 fACukC'vQJ Ck%". OM *9 vOM 13- 20 Year Old 0j~d Ie 8040" of laE allne wJ *10 fed______bffayoey ph-. V4 "~.sa ia -. .emli oa qn SVV#14(-ftDCN Ckk ?lofa

"q iltW0 *"at. ?MV1d Of 0uimm.Aw h saw sw$ &.&apj4 t pba wt m.&hF11 ei wwbwaid tast ft wu* ft esdwm.brg .mo toecffect (wag asem ma&rstu so Villabeu. Priecirel Gary aw 48V ao9Wc to ft -he%*Ag1Cm Uwee~.q fteww M ofA 00=0 MySnLIS O bC MWIIfitd i Of3I M be o ft~ a0O f 6 & W N O gM~ W W % M' itd L WbSIKe b elt 5 1 V Onevew womaSWnh of . Aw. inw a -I' "Wo am TboaL 6500Ilawo %aba nogm heAM*.% o# VW*V bow(Ric do 4'Wtnaa7 (A" NO& psuh vim Say aK £.u vkft sudeftaeW

The1,10mBySM beve U1 &VM V

go= w-0. InI5 06 9 446imb - %% Psc yn

every Chistma?

Voandeing Sto aimesl 12S R $1.0 mts tMh armto V" idNIgOLIS m

este Jewelrymas? dnownd WV60c I 6goldTo

m&wme ' ghard mai & fin neldin perlm -weral gift_0_

on ~espo apmnaL *en banfsuol appairs&ie 51wOf

W~~ync -one' &oe highDAILY * 53-550 RtIeah lza(nx t Sa~ticludin pockethy Iach DAE.9

W&E Iowent 30, 1994 7 LAW OFFICt8 JAMES IM MIAJ.GAN, JM ARTHUR a. CONNOL.Y AMTNut CMNNOLLY. J CONNOLLY, BOVE, LODGE & HUTZ PANfil EMeR6ITUG MU0OX0 ft 4UT2 WE1111INE,, ,UT PMA*O i. P[1ErNEIt 1220 MARKET STIMTr 10"4.1070 JOHNe 0 PlAsRC~&.0 (MI eARI P-o. box ao0 JDAIIAN11411-11 "1I0. MOVI. JR ' IRtCHAflO N ICK (D C GAR) PAUl CRAVwO4*o WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19000 09y Co4~WE TAMLtEY C MACEL. III P IR.PTSN ITON " YMOM4AS M M5SNS3SIII.4I[ TiL.apNsOI (a")b $gt-411 0N49M I QALLAQjgR. in *k.HA N. 01. RTGAX*+ PATRICIA SMMNK "..O.KI k[O ft PAZUNtAi FAc6101lUg (Oft) t11-ses M04AY W.UR N RCH.i-AMO ImOWS~s IPd M) -01. - IIIERIC "UTZ l#4C01AR DAVID LEVIN i@oNN AMIS 40*Nt A CLARK tt R~.~-E~ NoMPMORRNJRn ,IPA "i~

JAESar 0. MIS AN JAME"COLLIISJ . WOODS sgr aRqJ CCKASi JSCITI JOR ASM11LiEVI PRURNURf WIJAM I MC94ANE iPA BAN) EOftAO F EATON January 4, 1995 JA.lMESl T MOORE J DUMANT C C.4AIKL8 ANN[ L*^5LARNETT GE lAR*OM O NOiJMeI 2. Ms. Alva E. Smith Office of General Counsel Federal Election Commission Washington, D.C. 20463

Re: lUA 40U

Dear Ms. Smith: We represent the Democratic State Committee of Delaware. Enclosed is the designation of counsel, signed by party treasurer H. Thomas Hannagan, authorizing the undersigned the represent the Party in this matter. In specific answer to the allegations of Dana DiSabatino, please take note of the following: 0 Mr. Don Henley indeed made a contribution to the Democratic State Committee of Delaware. Th contribution was in the amount of $20,000, a copy of the check is enclosed. Accordingly, the claims in paragraphs (a) and (b) of page 2 of Ms. DiSabatino's letter are inaccurate.

* The purpose of the contribution vas for the general use of the Democratic Party of Delaware in supporting its voters registration and voter turnout operations for the entire Demo- cratic ticket, from local campaigns to the race for United States Senate. A copy of the letter of thanks and acknowledgement, stating the purposes for which the contribution is to be used, signed by Gary Hindes dated September 6, 1994, is enclosed. Accordingly, the claims in paragraph (c) of page 2 of Ms. DiSabatino's letter are inaccurate.

* The $20,000 contribution was received by the Democratic State Committee and deposited into its state party account, for use in its coordinated campaign. The amount of such a contribution is permitted under Delaware law, as conceded by Ms. DiSaba- tino. The money was not spent for "a Federal Campaign," as Ms. Alva E. Smith January 6, 1995 Page 2

alleged by Ms. DiSabatino, but rather, with other contributions, was used for customary party-building operations of the Demo- cratic Party. Accordingly, the claims in paragraph (d) of page 2 of Ms. DiSabatino's letter are inaccurate. By way of explanation, it appears that Ms. Disabatino's letter was founded on an erroneous report in a small weekly newspaper that was later retracted. The error appeared in THz WAVE, a small weekly newspaper with an entry-level staff published in Bethany Beach, Delaware. You already have the article. You may not have the subsequent correction, published by THm WAVE on November 30, retracting the statement on which Ms. DiSabatino relies, and stating that the sentence should have read: "Rock Star and Eagles singer Don Henley contributed $20,000 to the state Democratic Party campaign chest."

Thus, the sentence on which Ms. DiSabatino's entire complaint was premised was retracted by the newspaper which published it in error. A copy of the correction is enclosed. I trust tha'. the foregoing information and enclosed docu- ments will be sulficient for your office to conclude its examina- tion of the mattx.

We believe th&t the office of General Counsel should file a report that recommenci tat the Commission find no reason to believe that the complaint of Ms. DiSabatino sets forth a possible violation of the Act and accordingly that the Commission shall close the file in the matter. If you have need for additional information, do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

Cha/les J. Durante CJD/jc Enclosures: Designation of Counsel Check Letter of Acknowledgement Retraction of THE WAVE Democratic Party of Delaware *4 GARY . HIWDES Chaeimn

LEANW. 89MT September 6, 1994

Mr. Don Henley N.TWOS"S NANNAAL c/o Kaufman & Co., Inc. JO. 1201 Alta Loma Road West Hollywood, CA 90069 MARM Immor Dear Mr. Henley, MANY WANRWt W&LUAMS Thank you for your very generous contribution to the "Victory '94" Coordinated Campaign. Your support will help all of our Democratic candidates in Delaware to achieve victory in November. With specific and targeted efforts, we can and will make the term "Victory '94" come true. Efforts such as using the mobile van to register new voters, targeting Get-Out-The-Vote mailings and setting up phone banks will be possible because of your help. From local campaigns to the U.S. Senate race, our candidates are well qualified to represent Democratic interests everywhere. On behalf of all our Democratic candidates, we want to thank you again for your support. It really means a great deal.

Sincerely,

0 Box 20M5

e 2 2 996-9458 &X 32. 996-9405

P8DEO R vE 1*SR Moc State CommREe.

-- Qmo--DEMOCRATS SERVE-DELAWARE BEST! t~ Ii U's~JL New Lo:ng eck School W-l Eam EMES Problems *9 wchseh Wd m _lmq Of h mw Legm f *e*eWsms mey 1,4V%,tsd 1"InSeA0 efkm c0,Mkln &Vafd aft ms The *PMos or La oNkeb *9Mm0d PeIG&M Mwms he DWIRmmabmbemr w"AIeom o %1 a,16 SWI an"Week. t"so L" ow&a" ma MiNsbum eai bd -t,best ,, mame,. amttaeewyin"M t#eem shgAit 9W "Wem A.5- La thu mw.A, Waft. askaTnf Wi"ft' am WW"I =InVVWW of &Mb Tweafty, WM*7el Seed "dte" ~sew last I* VA0 md-ee t,,me So,Seq pi CVk MSiWe, Vwoe e "It m 'esv. Pe"mNm -_ u,,,, on A bw . PTA,, 0t QWMon.- I in einelm0*6e1 Ag tbam "M beMe Ibee6 mecreod from ,rdseig a*"d W he me I" eW 09"teWm"onW"Imas plmoor*0a* ad asestamo, ,dpwe!wma a,,w Ch,. "01 %M4. M " 00We.him CA ms- T119 es ,'me4 will ek skM We. Ftit"C"vAgb l~csmw mtqke t meto e" We- ad.ft*task,. g"ee bP, m.tdeg M oft a~d sepew. ~gA "b vhra".#ft 4m. u Kitllug'O Pese, Olt Gary a"*1 *0b. the eomeoeqsW ft0leam. "1- WNf06t M wi"dneq a wk** ftino omCnegg fW. atS emON row bw &reetwirM P"'Wo a 46* a llmt Un- so *. Oof ft ~a we mpso 'I % u be i - em,-e.&es eem b i W~*eaehft" aewrape~. ft e.s its She *bee. w et-esof" I* tA; i" Sh-%% A W am aWat peoe hostay It LE30 e y The ktw we sm, Io Sprem " esI&.. ma . j ebof "=a=*&mebm= id.. ce'ea b"%e hom fin do JU bm~e 7". SeatoOW Who~gmby ft il bee HOURHAPPY " .. We,,ag-,m ..... al mT1 meba"tm taf *;~ ft.."PeftmW t .N it *4- Nowaf W di us b f -.e$1uce 04* UCK I" OFF" 4- 71 - 7pm ), Same problem $1 Off 8.WMus8WqwbW every Christmas?

l~m~thm WpbSme m ? Stop wandering aimlessly -$1.00nts through a mall & find VI toto. a IAphW tmo the perfect - personal gift "Loca oMr. R o $!o Estate Jewelry -L Ws o diamonds & silver * gold WANG ?ANG MmVaX YpsmI engagerent bands v I M emo.I men & women's high grade Watches including pocket watches AatAnamS W8s antiues 0 coins 9 art a cillctibim- glassware e toy% D On the I appvouiaig * professioral repair, "BUCK OFF" $1 25 dwswu M"s, Sl ow U~~ Rt. Y_-n,* Beech jarmcPlaza - OPEN DAILY 1 537-5540 61 15 gee01* (next to Sper01 st Rettly) * Rethany Beach, DE F~f 54FNVCfLN ~

WAVE )' 1~ 30K 7 t 824 DO IU]N ]RY Cien ... vendorBanik 000 CTY O NAL BA 08-30-4 check No. ISO

C0RIIIJFIONI 20,00 TO iTATE ACCO I VICTORy '94

C/O KAUFN AND COAUr* 120, ATA IWC. SA ,O ylo-639."95 WX6T HOLINyY~~,cA gew

..;" . uum-. .. 9)LUg CA.. 9Wo:: •o& .. 191.60 PAY Ten t h sa,4 Dolls x 94 .: . , t~y No. CONT-hIrJtIoN TO St .

~vW~T to T#f V1 C'ORY •94 of 4- . ,4 =. 3MO6-199S 6134 FFXRI PM'I MANAEM~NT q6%lZM%6~ P04114ft.U4

urM 4096 -W a Charle.s J. D9rpt

-. Anno'lx- Ram1. lamo~f Utz P..0 InW 2 2ft7 wilainat 19299 302 -658-9 141 W M8

IM aboy.-4400 uiviul Le heceby .eLyat* 40 My co...)em4 LMs auborivae to c.oeIv@ any ntilflte OWsneube

iatmieftLonS leto lbM coisejion w to act amy behaf bsboacs the comalefies.

sigmute u (I

~ininy.. , . Thomas- Tanaaneja surer mum. ~~D*Mcratic t±~C~t o

'Wilmiinton,- Teolawaro 19899

U- 302-634. 1231 mum -a 302-996-9458

TOTAL P.001 FE -

BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION jLuN13 34ci~ In the Matter of ) ) Enforcement Priority

GENERAL COUNSEL#S MONTHLY REPORT SENSITVE I. INTRODUCTION

This report is the General Counsel's Report to recommend that the Commission no longer pursue the identified lower priority and stale cases under the Enforcement Priority System. II. CASES RECOMMENDED FOR CLOSING

A. Cases Not Warranting Further Pursuit Relative to Other Cases Pending Before the Comission A critical component of the Priority System is identifying those pending cases that do not warrant the f trther expenditure of resources. Each incoming matter is evaluated using Commission-approved criteria and cases that, based on their rating, do not warrant pursuit relative to other pending cases are placed in this category. By closing such cases, the

Commission is able to use its limited resources to focus on more

important cases.

Having evaluated incoming matters, chis Office has

identified 10 cases which do not warrant further pursuit

relative to the other pending cases. A short description of each case and the factors leading to assignment of a relatively low priority and consequent recommendation not to pursue each

1. These matters are: MUR 4087; MUR 4092; MUR 4093; MUR 4096; MUR 4097; MUR 4098; MUR 4100; MUR 4103; MUR 4106; and MUR 4114. -2-

case is attached to this report. See Attachments 1-11. As the

Commission requested, this Office has attached the responses to

the complaints for the externally-generated matters and the

referral for the internally-generated matter following the narrative. See Attachments 1-11.

B. Stale Cases

Investigations are severely impeded and require relatively more resources when the activity and evidence are old.

Consequently, the Office of General Counsel recommends that the

Commission focus its efforts on cases involving more recent activity. Such efforts will also generate more impact on the current electoral process and are a more efficient allocation of our limited resources. To this end, this Office has identified

34 cases that

do not warrant further investment of significant

Commission resources.2 Since the recommendation not to pursue the identified cases is based on staleness, this Office has not prepared separate narratives for these cases. As the Commission

requested, in matters in which the Commission has made no

2. These matters are: MUR 2582; MUR 3109; MUR 3241; MUR 3426; MUR 3857; MUR 3858; MUR 3862; MUR 3866; MUR 3876; MUR 3879; MUR 3890; MUR 3893; MUR 3895; MUR 3896; MUR 3898; MUR 3902; MUR 3903; MUR 3904; MUR 3905; MUR 3907; MUR 3908; MUR 3912; MUR 3933; MUR 3958; MUR 3962; MUR 3978; MUR 3984; RAD 93L-19; RAD 94L-05; RAD 94L-11; RAD 94L-15; RAD 94L-21; RAD 94L-23; and RAD 94L-26. -3- findings, the responses to the complaints for the externally-generated matters and the referrals for the internally-generated matters are attached to the report. See Attachments 16-45. For cases in which the Commission has already made findings and for which each Commissioner's office has an existing file, this Office has attached the most recent General Counsel's Report. See Attachments 12-15. This Office recommends that the Commission exercise its prosecutorial discretion and no longer pursue the cases listed below effective June 26, 1995. By closing the cases effective June 26, 1995, CED and the Legal Review Team will respectively have the additional time necessary for preparing the closing letters and the case files for the public record for these cases.

III. RBCORNMEDATIONS

A. Decline to open a MUR and close the file effective June 26, 1995 in the following matters:

1) RAD 93L-19 2) RAD 94L-05 3) RAD 94L-11 4) RAD 94L-15 5) RAD 94L-21 6) RAD 94L-23 7) RAD 94L-26 B. Take no action, close the file effective June 26, 1995, and approve the appropriate letter in the following matters:

1) MUR 3857 2) MUR 3858 3) MUR 3862 -4- 4) MUR 3866 5) MUR 3876 6) MUR 3879 7) HUR 3890 8) MUR 3893 9) MUR 3895 10) MUR 3896 11) MUR 3898 12) HUR 3902 13) MUR 3903 14) MUR 3904 15) MUR 3905 16) MUR 3907 17) MUR 3908 18) MUR 3912 19) MUR 3933 20) MUR 3958 21) MUR 3962 22) MUR 3978 23) MUR 3984 24) MUR 4087 25) MUR 4092 26) MUR 4093 27) MUR 4096 28) MUR 4097 29) MUR 4098 30) MUR 4100 31) MUR 4103 32) MUR 4106 33) MUR 4114

C. Take no further action, close the file effective June 26, 1995, and approve the appropriate letter in the following matters:

1) MUR 2582 2) MUR 3109 3) MUR 3241 4) MUR 3426

ate awrence M. Noble 0 General Counsel BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

in the Matter of ) Agenda Document Enforcement Priority ) #X95-52

CERTIFICATION

I, Marjorie V. Emmons, recording secretary for the Federal Election Commission executive session on June 27, 1995, do hereby certify that the Commission decided by a vote of 6-0 on each of the matters listed below to take the actions hereinafter described:

A. Decline to open a MUR and close the file effective July 5. 1995 in the following matters: 1) MAD 93L-19 2) MAD 94L-05 3) MAD 94L-11 4) MAD 94L-15 5) R D 94L-21 6) AD 94L-23 7) MAD 94L-26

B. Take no action, close the file effective July 5, 1995, and approve the appropriate letter in the following matters: 1) MUR 3857 2) MUR 3858 3) MUR 3862

(continued) Federal Election Comission Page 2 Certification: Enforcement Priority June 27, 1995

4) RUR 3S66 5) RUR 3876 6) NUR 3879 7) UR 3890 8) RUR 3893 9) RUR 3895 10) MR 3896 11) MRl 3898 12) RUM 3902 13) HR 3903 14) RUl 3904 15) RUR 3905 16) RUR 3907 17) MUM 3908 18) RUM 3912 NIN 19) RUR 3933 20) MRM 39S8 721) RuM 3962 22) Rum 3978 C- 23) RUR 3984 24) RUR 4087 25) RUR 4092 26) IUR 4093 27) RUi 4096 28) RUR 4097 29) RUR 4098 30) RUR 4100 31) RUR 4103 32) RUR 4106 33) HUR 4114

(continued) Federal Election Commission Page 3 Certification: Enforcement Priority June 27, 1995

C. Take no further action, close the file effective July S, 199S, and appropriate approve the letter in the following matters:

1) MUR 2582 2) MUR 3109 3) MUI 3242 4) MUR 3426

Commissioners Aikens, EZliott, McDonald, NcGarry, Potter, and Thomas voted affirmatively for the decision with respect to each of these actions. NO \0 Attest:

C7 Date " FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION vASHINCTON DC 20461

July 6, 1995

Dana DiSabatino 2600 West 7th Street Apt. G2 Wilmington, DE 19805

RE: MUR 4096 Dear Ms. DiSabatino: On October 21, 1994, the Federal Election Commission received your complaint alleging certain violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (*the Act"). After considering the circumstances of this matter, the Commission has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and to take no action against the respondents. See attached narrative. Accordingly, the Commission closed its &Tein this matter on July 5, 1995. This matter will become part of the public record within 30 days. The Act allows a complainant to seek judicial review of the Comission's dismissal of this action. See 2 U.S.C. 5 437g(a)(8).

Sincerely,

Mary L. Taksar Attorney

Attachment Narrative RUn 4096 OBERLY 83t4&T3 C01flTT3 Dana DiSabatino filed a complaint alleging that Don Henley either made a $100,000 contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee or that he gave the same amount to the Democratic State Party of Delaware as earmarked for the Oberly Senate Committee.

Don Henley responds that he never made the alleged $100,000 contribution. According to Mr. Henley, the only contribution made was a $20,000 contribution to Victory '94, a state committee formed by the Democratic Party of Delaware, on or about August 30, 1994, and the newspaper account is incorrect. Mr. Henley submitted a supplemental response which indicates that the newspaper retracted its earlier statement regarding the contribution and clarified that Mr. Henley made a $20,000 contribution to the state Democratic Party campaign chest. The Democratic State Committee of Delaware states that the complaint was based on an erroneous report in a small weekly newspaper that was later retracted. This matter is less significant relative to other matters pending before the Commission. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGION DC 20461

July 6, 1995

Charles M. Oberly III 3409 Lancaster Pike Wilmington, DE 19805 RE: MUR 4096

Dear Mr. Oberly III: On October 28, 1994, the Federal Election Commission notified you of a complaint alleging certain violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended. A copy of the complaint was enclosed with that notification. After considering the circumstances of this matter, the Commission has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and to take no action against you. See attached narrative. Accordingly, the Commission closed T- file in this matter on July 5, 1995. The confidentiality provisions of 2 U.S.C. 5 437g(a)(12) no longer apply and this matter is now public. In addition, although the complete file must be placed on the public record within 30 days, this could occur at any time following certification of the Commission's vote. If you wish to submit %N, any factual or legal materials to appear on the public record, please do so as soon as possible. While the file may be placed on the public record prior to receipt of your additional materials, any permissible submissions will be added to the public record when received. If you have any questions, please contact Alva E. Smith at (202) 219-3400.

Sincerely,

Mary L. Taksar Attorney Attachment Narrative MUR 4096 OBERLY S3NATE CORNIThKT Dana DiSabatino filed a complaint alleging that Don Henley either made a $100,000 contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee or that he gave the same amount to the Democratic State Party of Delaware as earmarked for the Oberly Senate Committee. Don Henley responds that he never made the alleged $100,000 contribution. According to Mr. Henley, the only contribution made was a $20,000 contribution to Victory '94, a state committee formed by the Democratic Party of Delaware, on or about August 30, 1994, and the newspaper account is incorrect. Mr. Henley submitted a supplemental response which indicates that the newspaper retracted its earlier statement regarding the contribution and clarified that Mr. Henley made a $20,000 contribution to the state Democratic Party campaign chest. The Democratic State Committee of Delaware states that the f) complaint was based on an erroneous report in a small weekly newspaper that was later retracted. This matter is less significant relative to other matters pending before the Commission. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGTON 0 ( 2O4lI

July 6, 1995

John D. Oberly, Treasurer Oberly Senate Committee 3409 Lancaster Pike Wilmington, DR 19805 RE: MUR 4096

Dear Mr. Oberly: On October 28, 1994, the Federal Election Commission notified you of a complaint alleging that the Oberly Senate Committee and you, as treasurer, may have violated the Federal Election Campaign act of 1971, as amended. A copy of the complaint was enclosed with that notification. After considering the circumstances of this matter, the Commission has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and to take no action against the Oberly Senate Committee and you, as treasurer. See attached narrative. Accordingly, the Commission closed-Tts file in this matter on July 5, 1995. The confidentiality provisions of 2 U.S.C. 5 437g(a)(12) no longer apply and this matter is now public. In addition, although the complete file must be placed on the public record within 30 days, this could occur at any time following certification of the Commissiones vote. If you wish to submit any factual or legal materials to appear on the public record, please do so as soon as possible. While the file may be placed on the public record prior to receipt of your additional materials, any permissible submissions will be added to the public record when received. If you have any questions, please contact Alva E. Smith at (202) 219-3400.

Sincerely,

Mary L. Taksar Attorney

Attachment Narrative MuR 4096 OSKRLY SEMTZ CORRITTU3

Dana DiSabatino filed a complaint alleging that Don Henley either made a $100,000 contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee or that he gave the same amount to the Democratic State Party of Delaware as earmarked for the Oberly Senate Committee.

The Democratic State Committee of Delaware states that the complaint was based on an erroneous report in a small weekly newspaper that was later retracted.

This matter is less significant relative to other matters pending before the Commission. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D C 1046

July 6, 1995

Ronald a. Turovsky, Rsq. Manatt, Phelps & Phillips 11355 west Olympic Blvd. LOS Angeles, CA. 90064-1614 RE: MUR 4096 Don Henley Dear Mr. Turovsky: On October 28, 1994, the Federal Election Commission notified your client of a complaint alleging certain violations of the Federal Blection Campaign Act of 1971, as amended. A copy of the complaint was enclosed with that notification. After considering the circumstances of this matter, the Commission has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and to take no action against your client. See attached narrative. Accordingly, the Commission closed-'ts file '0 in this matter on July 5, 1995. '0 The confidentiality provisions of 2 U.S.C. S 4379(a)(12) no longer apply and this matter is now public. In addition, although the complete file must be placed on the public record within 30 days, this could occur at any time following certification of the Commission's vote. If you wish to submit Vany factual or legal materials to appear on the public record, please do so as soon as possible. While the file may be placed on the public record prior to receipt of your additional materials, any permissible submissions will be added to the public record when received.

If you have any questions, please contact Alva E. Smith at (202) 219-3400.

Sincerely,

M"~OA Cf. -Tcovor- Mary L. Taksar Attorney

Attachment Narrative NR 4096 OBERLY S3NTZ COIMITTES Dana DiSabatino filed a complaint alleging that Don Henley either made a $100,000 contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee or that he gave the same amount to the Democratic State Party of Delaware as earmarked for the Oberly Senate Committee. Don Henley responds that he never made the alleged $100,000 contribution. According to Mr. Henley, the only contribution made was a $20,000 contribution to, Victory '94, a state committee formed by the Democratic Party of Delaware, on or about August 30, 1994, and the newspaper account is incorrect. Mr. Henley submitted a supplemental response which indicates that the newspaper retracted its earlier statement regarding the contribution and clarified that Mr. Henley made a $20,000 contribution to the state Democratic Party campaign chest. The Democratic State Committee of Delaware states that the complaint was based on an erroneous report in a small weekly newspaper that was later retracted. This matter is less significant relative to other matters pending before the Commission. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINC TON, DC 2046

July 6, 1995

Charles J. Durante Connolly, Bove# Lodge & Rutz P.O. Box 2207 wilmington, DR 19899 RE: MUR 4096 H. Thomas Hannagan, Treasuer Democratic State Committee Delaware Dear Mr. Durante: On October 28. 1994v the Federal Election Commission notified your client of a complaint alleging certain violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended. A copy of the complaint was enclosed with that notification. After considering the circumstances of this matter, the Commission has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and to take no action against your client. See attached narrative. Accordingly, the Commission closed-Tts file in this matter on July S. 1995. The confidentiality provisions of 2 U.S.C. S 437g(a)(12) no longer apply and this matter is now public. In addition, although the complete file must be placed on the public record within 30 days. this could occur at any time following certification of the Commissiongs vote. If you wish to submit any factual or legal materials to appear on the public record, please do so as soon as possible. While the file may be placed on the public record prior to receipt of your additional materials, any permissible submissions will be added to the public record when received. if you have any questions, please contact Alva E. Smith at (202) 219-3400.

Sincerely,

Mary L. Taksar Attorney Attachment Narrative HtR 4096 OBRLY SKRAMT CONNTT88 Dana DiSabatino filed a complaint alleging that Don Henley either made a $100,000 contribution to the Oberly Senate Committee or that he gave the same amount to the Democratic State Party of Delaware as earmarked for the Oberly Senate Committee. Don Henley responds that he never made the alleged $100,000 contribution. According to Mr. Henley, the only contribution made was a $20,000 contribution to victory '94, a state committee formed by the Democratic Party of Delaware, on or about August 30, 1994, and the newspaper account is incorrect. Mr. Henley submitted a supplemental response which indicates that the newspaper retracted its earlier statement regarding the contribution and clarified that Mr. Henley made a $20,000 contribution to the state Democratic Party campaign chest. The Democratic State Committee of Delaware states that the complaint was based on an erroneous report in a small weekly newspaper that was later retracted. This matter is less significant relative to other matters pending before the Commission. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20463

THIS IS 'RE END OF UJ #

DATE FILMED lzw CNURAN0,