Our letter to Mr.

Ashby:

Subject: Your Representation of the Fauquier County Republican Committee.

Mr. Ashby,
My name is Cameron Jones, and I am contacting you regarding questions that myself and several
members of the Fauquier County Republican Committee (FCRC) have about your stated
representation of the FCRC at large.
Over the past three years, you and/or your firm have on at least two occasions, presented
yourselves as representing the interests of the Fauquier County Republican Committee (FCRC)
at large.
In 2016 you were employed by members of the FCRC Executive Committee (EC) to represent
the committee at large, in meetings and negotiations with the RPV as they fought to nullify the
January 2015 State Central Committee (SCC) resolution which directed a new FCRC canvass,
following a two thirds decision by the SCC declaring the 2014 canvass invalid.
In the most recent action involving an appeal to 5th District, your attorney indicated in an email
dated December 2nd addressed to the 5th District Chairman, that she is representing the FCRC.
In the 2016 action against the RPV, the FCRC EC sought and received approval from the
committee at large to hire legal counsel, and to pay this counsel from donations solicited for that
purpose. According to RPV leadership, they dealt with you personally for 20-30 hours during
these negotiations, and you were present all day on the day of the 2016 canvass; your fees were
certainly substantial.
In the most recent action, the FCRC Executive Committee did not seek or receive approval from
the committee at large to hire legal counsel, and since all expenditures over $100 must be
approved by the committee at large (we're reasonably sure your fees will far exceed this amount),
there is no authorization to expend committee funds to hire legal counsel.
Recognizing that attorneys and law firms represent the interests of those who pay them, we
would like to know who is paying you.
We have all of the 2016 and 2017 financial reports filed with the Virginia State Board of
Elections by the FCRC Treasurer as required. Nowhere in these reports is listed a donation either
designated for the purpose of hiring legal counsel, or of sufficient amount to cover such
expenses. There is also no record of any expenditure to you or your firm.
Since any donation to the committee over $100, and all expenditures by the committee must be
reported to the SBE, we conclude that you were not paid by the FCRC, and therefore were
representing the interests of someone other than the committee at large.
Either that, or there is a probable violation of campaign finance law and/or SBE regulations,
possible illegal manipulation of the FCRC financial statements and Treasurer reports, and a
probable cover up surrounding the internal financial audits required by the FCRC bylaws.
It is our view that our Treasurer is honest beyond reproach, and that the most likely scenario is
that certain members of the FCRC are using the name of the committee at large to protect other
interests.
It is also our view that an attorney or law firm that falsely represents the interests of an
organization such as the FCRC in a process, legal or political, with full knowledge that they are
being paid by someone other than the organization they claim to represent, is at a minimum
guilty of questionable ethical conduct. Such questionable conduct could result in a tremendous
loss of confidence by clients, current and potential.
We hope you recognize your interest in helping us determine the truth in this matter.
Since your firm claimed to represent the interests of the FCRC at large in each of the actions
cited above, and since the FCRC clearly did not pay for your services, we believe that the
membership of the FCRC has a right to know who did pay for your services and how much. We
are also confident they will demand to know once this information is made public.
We will be awaiting your reply.
Respectfully,
Cameron Jones
[And Members]

Mr. Ashby’s reply to the members:

Subject: Fwd: Your Representation of the Fauquier County Republican Committee.

All:
I recently received the message below from Cameron Jones regarding my law firm's
representation of the Fauquier County Republican Committee. The message requests
information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege, but Mr. Jones is neither my client
nor a member of my client. After reviewing this matter and considering Mr. Jones' request, the
FCRC Executive Committee authorized me to make this response to you, the FCRC members
whose names Mr. Jones signed to his message.
In the Summer of 2014, Scott Russell, Jim Rich, George Beveridge and Tom Valk retained me to
represent them in connection with litigation against the Republican Party of Virginia and the
First Congressional District Committee arising out of the March 22, 2014 party canvass, Mr.
Jones' contest of the results of that election and subsequent appeals. Warrenton attorney Peter
Thomas Hansen represented the FCRC in that lawsuit.
In the negotiations, settlement and new election that followed the filing of the Russell lawsuit, at
the request and subject to the direction of the FCRC Executive Committee, I took the lead and
represented both the Russell plaintiffs and the FCRC, those parties having determined that their
interests in vindicating the conduct and results of the March 22, 2014 canvass and asserting the
unit committee's right under the RPV Party Plan to call, control and conduct its own elections
were completely aligned. [FN1] My legal fees for this work were paid under my engagement
letter with the Russell plaintiffs.
With regard to Mr. Jones' most recent contest, of the results of the September 12, 2017
membership election, the FCRC Executive Committee requested me to advise and represent the
FCRC in connection with the party appeals process. I have not yet submitted an invoice for this
work, so no one has paid me anything for it.
Lastly, in response to Mr. Jones' allegation that "there is a probable violation of campaign
finance law and/or SBE regulations, possible illegal manipulation of FCRC financial statements
and Treasurer reports, and a probably cover up surrounding the internal financial audits required
by the FCRC bylaws":
Virginia law requires a political party committee to file a "report of disbursements" that "shall
include all expenditures." Va. Code § 24.2-950.4(D). Under Virginia law, an "expenditure" is
defined as a disbursement made "for the purpose of expressly advocating the election or defeat of
a clearly identified candidate," Va. Code § 24.2-945.1 [FN2], and a "candidate" is "a person who
seeks or campaigns for an office of the Commonwealth or one of its governmental units." Va.
Code § 24.2-101. Legal fees incurred in connection with an election for party office simply are
not within the scope of Virginia's campaign finance disclosure requirement. Indeed, the very
first paragraph of the Campaign Finance Disclosure Act of 2006 itself emphasizes this point:

Va. Code 24.2-945 - Elections to which chapter applicable. A. The provisions of this chapter
shall apply to all elections held in Virginia, including referenda, and to nominating conventions,
mass meetings, and other methods to nominate a political party candidate for public office,
except nominations and elections for (i) members of the United States Congress, (ii) President
and Vice President of the United States, (iii) town office in a town with a population of less than
25,000, (iv) directors of soil and water conservation districts, or (v) political party committees.
Therefore, to the extent that there was any in-kind contribution to the FCRC based upon legal
fees paid under my engagement letter with the Russell plaintiffs in the course of my joint
representation of the Russell plaintiffs and the FCRC - and I do not concede that there was - the
FCRC was not required to log or otherwise report it. And, the FCRC is not required to report
payments of my fees going forward unless it disburses general treasury funds to pay them, in
which case it would need to do so in order for its bank account to reconcile to the reports it files
with the Virginia Department of Elections.
I trust that this response adequately addresses the issues raised in Mr. Jones' email message.
Please know that I do not intend to engage in any further back and forth over these or other
FCRC matters. Simply put, your issues are with the committee, not me. And, if I do not respond
to future communications from any of you, Mr. Jones or others, you should not interpret my
silence as agreement with, acceptance of or acquiescence in any arguments, claims and demands
you make.
Sincerely,
Chris Ashby

[FN1] I expect and understand that you may disagree on this point. However, neither Mr. Jones
nor any of you are the FCRC Chair, a member of the FCRC Executive Committee, or other
responsible officer with authority to make decisions on behalf of the FCRC - including but not
limited to decisions regarding representation of the FCRC in connection with legal proceedings.
And, as the results of the April 2, 2016 FCRC party canvass revealed, the views expressed in Mr.
Jones' letter do not represent those of a majority of the committee as it currently is constituted.
At bottom, I was engaged by the FCRC Executive Committee, and represented the interests of
the FCRC as determined by the committee's majority and expressed through the authorizations
and instructions I received from the Executive Committee.
More fundamentally, I do not agree, as Mr. Jones alleges, that "attorneys and law firms represent
the interests of those who pay them." I represent the interests of my clients. And, as noted
above, in the context of the Russell litigation, both the Russell plaintiffs and the FCRC's
Executive Committee determined that their interests (i.e., the interests of the Russell plaintiffs
and the interests of the FCRC) were completely aligned.
[FN2] The definition of "contribution" is similarly