Farm Sanctuary charged with 210 violations of Florida election campaign funding law

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, December 2002:

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. –Besides being chiefly symbolic, Florida
Amendment 10 may have been won at a price, for Farm Sanctuary,
going far beyond the $1.3 million raised to pass it by Floridans for
Humane Farms.
Farm Sanctuary was one of the four major funders of the
Amendment 10 campaign, along with the Animal Rights Foundation of
Florida, the Fund for Animals, and the Humane Society of the United
States.

Responding to a complaint received on April 29, the Florida
Elections Commission on August 15 found “probable cause” to charge
Farm Sanctuary with 210 counts of violating Florida election laws
“prohibiting a person from making contributions to or receiving
contributions on behalf of a political committee except through the
campaign treasurer,” an FEC press release said.
The campaign treasurer authorized to receive Amendment 10
campaign contributions was Floridans for Humane Farms, headed by
Pamela Huizinga-Van Hart, daughter of land developer and former
Florida Marlins baseball team owner Wayne Huizinga.
Farm Sanctuary allegedly broke the law–and is reportedly
under investigation for allegedly violating federal campaign finance
laws–with mailings urging recipients to support Amendment 10 and
claim a tax deduction too by sending their money to Farm Sanctuary,
“with a note specifying that your contribution is for the ‘Florida
Ballot Initiative Campaign.'”
Donations to political campaigns are not tax-deductible. By
issuing tax-exempt receipts, critics charge, Farm Sanctuary made
tax evaders of the donors.
Farm Sanctuary reportedly relayed more than $300,000 to
Floridans for Humane Farms.
The case was scheduled for a court hearing two weeks after
the election.
Lucy Morgan, Tallahas-see bureau chief for the St.
Peters-burg Times, wrote that “The elections complaint was filed
against Farm Sanctuary by David Mar-tosko of the Center for Consumer
Freedom in Washington D.C.,” a pro-alcohol, tobacco, and meat
industry front exposed by ANIMAL PEOPLE in April 2002.
Farm Sanctuary co-founder Gene Bauston on October 30 and
November 1 told ANIMAL PEOPLE that the initial complaints came from
California attorney Allan D. Teplinsky and St. Petersburg attorney
Pamela Camp-bell–and implied in e-mails to ANIMAL PEOPLE that he
suspects the rival Humane Farming Association might have “had
something to do with” the complaints.
HFA founder Brad Miller laughed that off.
Teplinsky, noted for representing conservative Jewish
groups, seemed to be an unlikely defender of the pork industry, but
an equally unlikely participant in any sort of conspiracy with an
animal rights group, having no visible history on animal issues.
Teplin-sky did not respond to questions from ANIMAL PEOPLE.
Replied Campbell, “No, I do not represent Brad Miller of
the Humane Farming Assoc., and no, I am not the show dog judge”
Pamela Campbell-Dzuik, who is prominent in the same region, “but I
do have a beautiful show cat, a Maine Coon.”
Farm Sanctuary and HFA have sharply differing tactical
philosophies, and have often clashed over legislative issues.
Farm Sanctuary, in common with HSUS, tends to pursue quick
symbolic “victories,” like the passage of Amendment 10, arguing
that a first priority is to establish the principle that certain
practices should be regulated, whether or not the initial
regulations effect real change.
HFA by contrast argues that since animal protection
legislation is seldom revisited by lawmakers to make improvements,
animal defenders should not support any bill which does not achieve a
significant advance.
HFA legislative successes, such as the 1999 passage of a
California bill to ensure prosecution of farmers in whole-herd
neglect cases, tend to be fewer but heavier in their immediate
impact.