First, Councilman Derek Townsend, then Mayor Gretchen Fagan. Now, Tomball city councilman Mark Stoll has become the latest to fall under the suspicious eye of a political watchdog group that keeps a close watch on political finances.

Stoll was first notified by the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) on Sept. 2 that a complaint had been filed against him by Alvin Schlieske of Conroe. However, according to Stoll, the TEC explained that Schlieske’s complaint was not properly completed, and therefore was not valid.

Stoll subsequently filed corrected versions of the forms Schlieske brought into question at City Hall on the morning of Sept. 27. Later that day, Stoll said, he received notification from the TEC of a valid complaint filed by Schlieske on Sept. 20.

Schlieske cites four forms that Stoll filed during Stoll’s successful 2009 campaign for Position 2 on the Tomball City Council: the 30th Day Report, filed on April 8, 2009; the 8th Day Report, filed on April 30, 2009; Stoll’s Final Report, filed on June 19, 2009; and the Runoff Report, filed on June 30, 2009.

In each of the four documents, Schlieske claims that Stoll initially submitted, among other allegations, incorrect contribution and expenditure figures.

For example, on his 30th Day Report filed on April 8, 2009, Stoll reported his “Total Political Contributions” as $3,200. Schlieske alleges that amount should have been reported as $3,050.

A Tribune analysis of the April 8 report revealed $3,050 in political contributions.

Additionally, Schlieske claims on the same report that Stoll should have reported $300 in total political contributions of $50 or less, and $70.92 as total political expenditures of $50 or less, rather than no amount that Stoll reported.

Stoll’s “Contribution Balance” on April 8 should have been reported as $1,339.39, not $1,489.39 as was initially stated, Schlieske claims.

Identical allegations were made on each of the four reports Schlieske called into question.

Schlieske also notes that on 11 instances, Stoll failed to “fully disclose” the name or address of a person or business “receiving a political expenditure.”

For example, for an April 4, 2009 expenditure for $260.40 at the United States Postal Service, Stoll did not include the post office’s complete address.

On three separate instances, Stoll is alleged by Schlieske not to have fully disclosed a purpose of payment. One example Schlieske cited was an April 1, 2009 expense to Office Depot in Tomball for $46.53. Stoll’s report did not include a purpose of payment for that cost.

In the corrections he filed with the City on Sept. 27, Stoll amended his reports to reflect the totals Schlieske cites, as well as included full addresses for expenditures and payment purposes.

Stoll explained that his alleged accounting errors were a result of his not realizing contributions and expenditures should have been reported independently in each report.

“I thought you accumulated those balances in your reporting figures and what I discovered is you don’t accumulate them, you only file for those exact periods instead of having a running total,” he said.

Stoll said he responded to the TEC allegations within the required 10 days.

“I was incorrect and I publicly thank the person who filed against me to bring to my attention,” he said.

In his complaint to the TEC, Schlieske states Stoll should understand the importance of public funds.

“(Stoll) knows the importance of following the law when dealing with the taxpayers’ public funds,” Schlieske stated. “He must also know that the same concerns apply when dealing with political campaign funds.”

Schlieske, who lives in Conroe, is currently running for Position 2 on the Conroe ISD Board of Trustees.

His complaint follows similar allegations against Townsend and Fagan by Thomas Curry and Jim Doyle, respectively. Each of the three complaints make similar claims and utilize identical language in their allegations.

By law, the TEC cannot comment on open investigations or complaints. According to a letter obtained by the Tribune that was sent to Stoll, the complaint is being processed as a “Category One” violation.

If found in violation of state law, Stoll is facing potential third degree felony charges.

Comments (1)

Subscribe to this comment's feed