Abuse of Power. Abuse of Finances. Abuse of Trust.

Chairman David 'Dilatory' Gellatly must be removed by the Central Committee of the Clark County Republican Party. In his short tenure as chairman, David has abused his power and position. He has abused the finances of the party, including bypassing the elected Treasurer in violation of the by-laws, and has run the party nearly into the red. He has abused the trust of those who would donate countless hours of time and energy with adolescent back-stabbing and manipulation.

We, the grassroots conservatives of the Clark County Republican Party, urge our board members and the PCO's to remove David as Chairman and replace him with a competent and mature leader who is ready to uphold the Core Principles of the party.

Here are just some of the facts and the reasons why we demand his removal:

  1. Between February and June 2017, Chairman Gellatly spent $965.14 of budgeted CCRP funds on Facebook advertisements, but failed to provide proper documentation in a timely manner being unaware that other people could not see invoices. This in clear violation of Clark County Republican Party (CCRP) Spending Policy which requires unbudgeted discretionary expenses, which exceed $200 per incident, to be approved by the Executive Board, and requires all expenses to have receipts and documentation for their purpose.
  2. Chairman Gellatly spent $400 of CCRP funds on two private events at Boomerang (Detour Ministries) [$200 on 3/2/2017; $200 on 4/12/2017] which did not acknowledge the CCRP’s contribution of funds.
  3. Chairman Gellatly spent $393.78 of CCRP funds on the 45th LD Senate candidate, who does not represent Clark County but directly affects majority control of the Washington Senate [$243.78 for hotel room, which the Hilton charged in error and the Chairman agreed to repay; $150 for space at Warehouse 23]. That spending is in direct violation of the law. County Parties and Legislative Districts may not spend money on campaigns that fall outside of their respective area. See RCW reference below.
  4. The untimely responses and lack of proper documentation constitute some of the reasons why Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) reports were late.
  5. The Chairman signed the contract to have Tomi Lahren be the speaker at the LDD on 2/21. The next day he presented it as a vote at the board meeting on 2/22. He finally presented the budget for it to the board on 3/1. The board never had a say in the LDD speaker choice until after the contract was signed.
  6. At the July 15, 2017 CCRP Central Committee meeting, the Treasurer had a slide detailing the financial state of the CCRP and the results of the LDD, and Chairman Gellatly requested the slide removed from the presentation, reluctantly agreed by the Treasurer, because of unknown outstanding invoices and receivables.
  7. The Chairman informed the board that he was going to negotiate for a reduction in the speaker fee for the LDD. The board approved a requirement that he get that reduced fee in writing. He never did. In fact, he circumvented the Treasurer and the bylaws requiring two signatures on a check, went to the bank and had a cashiers check sent to cover the remainder of the speaking fee.
  8. The Chairman's adolescent behavior on multiple social media venues throughout his tenure have served to undermine the integrity of the position and damage the reputation of the CCRP. This behavior has been widely document in social media and the Chairman has even admitted to his behavior in a letter to the PCO's. See examples here.
  9. The PCO’s approved support for I-1552. The Chairman failed to promote this initiative to the county Republicans through the party’s resources. I-1552 leaders sent the Chairman a prepared statement and he failed to send it out. He ignored numerous emails about the promotion of the initiative over a 3 week period. He failed to ensure a donation approved by the board be sent to the campaign. And finally, he failed to send out a last minute notice to Republican voters as encouraged to do so by state leaders.
  10. The Chairman reimbursed himself for expenses related to the last State Committee meeting of the WSRP. However, he did not attend the vast majority of the meetings. At the Executive Board meeting the issue of I-1552 was debated. The Chairman walked into that meeting after the debate had ended and was voted down. He did not represent the will of the CCRP Central Committee officially supporting the initiative. The Chairman also missed the important Resolutions Committee meeting and the Region 3 meetings.
  11. The Chairman allowed unrestricted access to the party's most valuable asset, voter data, to founders of the faux Republican group knows as Republicans of Clark County (RoCC).
  12. A special board meeting was called in accordance with the bylaws for September 2nd. The purpose of this meeting was to take a roll call vote on a resolution recommending sending the issue of the Chairman's removal to the Central Committee (PCO's). In that meeting the Chairman disrespected the members of the board and showed no regard for following Robert's Rules of Order. Additionally, knowing ahead of time that a 2/3's majority of the board was likely to vote in favor of the resolution, he brought back the former Vice Chair (who had resigned weeks before and a Central Committee meeting had already been called by the Chairman to replace her). The vote was 7-4 in favor of the resolution. Video evidence here.
  13. At the regularly scheduled board meeting on September 6th, the Chair opted to walk out of the meeting and encouraged enough of the other board members to do the same, thus breaking quorum and keeping the board from doing important business.

*The restriction is in RCW 42.17a.405(13): (13) Notwithstanding the other subsections of this section, no county central committee or legislative district committee may make contributions reportable under this chapter to a candidate specified in subsection (1) of this section, or an official specified in subsection (1) of this section against whom recall charges have been filed, or political committee having the expectation of making expenditures in support of the recall of an official specified in subsection (1) of this section if the county central committee or legislative district committee is outside of the jurisdiction entitled to elect the candidate or recall the official.

Kim Bradford, Public Disclosure Commission