Ramal defends his mayoral campaign finances

Mayoral runner-up Khalil Ramal believes a stack of documents he’s assembled answer the concerns raised about his 2022 campaign finances.

A formal complaint was filed with London’s Compliance Audit Committee on June 29.

The complaint alleges:

• Many financial donations over $100 fail to include the address and/or the name of a contributor
• A contribution accepted for $1,495 exceeds the $1,200 limit
• No expenses declared for phone, internet, or website hosting
• Expenses of $2,034 and $339 for ‘steel’ may be subject to the spending limit
• Other ‘revenue not deemed a contribution’ lists ‘3x50’ worth $150, which would exceed $25 limit

In an interview with CTV News London, Ramal responded to the questions about his campaign contributions and expenses.

“I’m more than happy to go before the committee and present all the info,” he said.

Ramal admitted that mailing addresses were not collected by an online system for donations over $100, but he can provide the committee with other identifying information.

“I believe if you have the phone number, if you have the email, it should be enough. Because everybody communicates with phone and emails these days,” he said while referring to a list on email addresses and phone numbers.

He added that if the committee insists on mailing addresses, he will contact each donor and ask for their information.

Ramal also has an explanation for not incurring telephone or online charges.

A communications device that was purchased for the campaign included a free introductory offer.

“The one we buy from Amazon gave us a certain amount of data that you could use, and we thought that was enough,” Ramal told CTV News London. “The volunteers, they have their own phones, and every one of us has unlimited phone calls and texting so there was no need to provide those.”

Ramal also showed a photocopy of a cheque returning $295 to a donor whose contribution exceeded the $1,200 limit by that amount.

He will appear by videoconference at the meeting of the Compliance Audit Committee to fully respond to the complaint on Wednesday.

Not part of the formal complaint, but in need of explanation, was how his campaign addressed its $32,786.63 deficit since the maximum contribution a candidate and their spouse can make to their own campaign is $25,000.

Ramal admitted paying the remainder out of his own pocket after the election, even though it put him over the contribution limit and allowed his campaign to spend a lot more money than it raised.

“At the end of the day, who is going to pay?” he asked rhetorically. “Who is going to donate to a person who lost an election? So I had to pay it. I’m responsible.”

He said he’s actually happy to see people engaging in the checks and balances related to election rules.

But he is also disappointed that the process has taken so long.

His campaign finances were filed with the clerk in late March.

While the campaign and volunteers made certain decisions last summer and fall, Ramal accepted responsibility.

“Sometimes [volunteers] don’t know the exact rules and regulations,” he said. “I’m the candidate, so I guess I should be responsible for everything.”