Watts election filings show how he qualified for CEP grant

NORWALK, Conn. – To try to clear up the roiling controversy that has popped up in our comments regarding the Citizens Election Program grant to Democratic 137th District state representative candidate David Watts, we combed through the candidate filings made by his wife and campaign treasurer, Kathleen Watts.

Following up on a conversation we had with the candidate prior to the grant being announced but after the application was made, we checked back to the 2013 exploratory committee filings and found that Watts did list the required number of donors and the required total of donations even before closing that committee and transferring the money – and the qualifying donors – to his new campaign committee in April.

The exploratory committee filings, which began in 2013, show a termination filing dated April 26, 2014, in which the campaign claims on line 14 of the Summary Page Totals $5,554 raised through donations from individuals aggregate throughout the exploratory committee’s existence. The funding requires a state rep candidate to secure $5,000 in small ($100 or less) donations from at least 150 people registered to vote in the city.

Watts SEEC30 Termination Report

The total actually on hand at the beginning of that reporting period – a quarterly report – was reported as $3,712.39, with $50.10 income reported for the quarter. That left $3,762.49 on hand, the report stated which was then paid out to the state representative committee. The report also list the individual donors for the period.

Other filings throughout the exploratory and campaign sections detail who donated and how much.

Watts told us before receiving the grant that he had thought he had qualified sooner, but there were some problems.

“Some of the people we listed had moved, changed addresses or didn’t live in Norwalk anymore, and so they couldn’t count” toward the 150 small-donation donors required to qualify for the CEP grant. That meant filing amended forms to correct addresses, and going out and finding some other new donors who were qualified.

The final total number of donors and the amount raised during the exploratory year, including the amendments, along with what was raised since April 26, qualified Watts for the money.

This link connects you to all of the filings. Select the type of committee on the top line (candidate or exploratory, or all), then the election year (2014), the candidate’s name and the office sought (choose undetermined for the exploratory committee, state representative foe the campaign committee). For form type and document, choose all.

Choose the exploratory termination report to see the $5,554 figure (see link above). Choose the other reports to see who has donated, where they are from, and how money has been spent. A caveat: Don’t draw conclusions about support from these or any other candidate reports. Many people give to multiple campaigns, even in the general election (several people gave to both mayoral candidates in the last election).

The link also will give you access to all other candidates. Follow the same steps with the appropriate names and offices. Some had exploratory campaigns, some did not. The local candidates for Republican registrar of voters are not included on the state site.



19 responses to “Watts election filings show how he qualified for CEP grant”

  1. Flip Wilms

    Why or how is this a news story?
    The real issue should be the ridiculous system of “exploratory” committees that can’t mention the specific office the person is seeking and but allows lots of money to be raised.
    And, let’s not forget that, if Citizen’s Election funding is newsworthy, Fred “Flip” Wilms announced very early that he had fully qualified for his state grant- in fact, he told any GOP insider who would listen that he had met the goal. Then, come to find out, he didn’t get his grant until months later. That kind of exaggeration should have been a news story.

  2. Watts Up Doc

    There is a story here. That is abusing the exploratory committee process. Does anyone with half a brain think as late as 4/25 that Watts had not decided to run or made his intent clear as to his candidacy? It seems everyone except the election commission knew that Watts was campaigning for this specific office.
    Some might think it is a non story, but others of us are offended to see someone getting almost $40,000 of taxpayer money to blow on pizza, donuts, and other kickbacks for votes called “outreach”…..especially from someone who doesn’t pay his own taxes. Irregularities in his campaign finances and reporting thereof are most definitely a story. Charges for apple store products…are these being used on our taxpayer funded Ipad we gave this guy so he could read his packets….you know the ones he still doesn’t read?

  3. Watts Up Doc

    Construing that someone claimed full grant access when in fact he or she only claimed that they had met thresholds for qualifying is a reach. Expecting some news story on it reaches even further.
    Perhaps more newsworthy are things like form letters with paid postage soliciting donations and also presence of lawn signs when no expenditures for such are reported in the time frame these started popping up. Those for example would be campaign finance violations and perhaps a news story, if anyone was interested in pursuing that. Fortunately for most involved they are not.
    I think more newsworthy is a system that makes it very easy for you to pull 500 names out of the phone book and pay them all $50 of taxpayer money for outreach without nary a paper trail to make sure they are real workers or real people for that matter.

  4. Oyster

    It looks as if Ms. Kathleen Watts has finally gotten around to changing her home address on the voter file to the new Watts abode.
    Unfortunately, this is going to mean another amended filling, since the Treasurers address on the report still lists her at the old homestead.

  5. we the people!

    @Watts up doc

    You continue to practice political malpractice. The Watts campaign uses mac computers and the apple store purchase was for IDraw which allows the campaign to design campaign materials in house.

    The Watts campaign doesn’t pay one stop shop political firms they can create and produce campaign materials in house.

    Yeah, the Watts campaign will keep spending money on pizza and doughnuts for volunteers.

    The Watts campaign raised the money in the community and will return it right back to the community.

    The Watts campaign is NOT supported by lobbyists, PACs nor beer and liquor distributors.

    The Watts campaign is for the people by the people.

  6. Bill

    Watts and his wife have made a career and good income off of running for political office

  7. we the people!


    First you talk about their son and now his wife.

    Kathleen is well respected teacher and has never been paid one dime by this party. In fact, I am sure this couple is losing money.

    Do you think people respect a person going after a 9 year old?

    Do you think people respect you for attacking Watts’ weight?

    You’re clearly on a race to the bottom of the barrel.

    NON had to debunk your biggest lie to date that Watts had all black people on his campaign bus.

    You should be banned from posting and another publication should put your face on the cover as the person who went after a 9 year old.


  8. Bill

    Great memory. Yes, I did blame you Mr. Watts for having your son actively campaign for you at events for adults, for being overweight and thus not being in any position to lead or set a good example, and from what I observed only busing in minorities to vote for you. Now I bring up the fact that you have no verifiable employment or income, yet you demand that hard working tax payers fund your campaign so that you might have full time government salary and pension as a politician. You are an unemployed, tax delinquent socialist; and I’m certain you will say you are proud of this because you think Jesus would condone this…he wouldn’t

  9. we the people!


    Do you think the people of this great city will stand by you when you have to defend these postings?

    The answer is NO. Picking on a 9 year old is a low class thing to do and in bad taste.

    Any publication that doesn’t block your hate speech is just as guilty as you writing it.

    Going after peoples weight is another form of discrimination.

    The day of the caucus you told on yourself and your recent postings make very clear who you are.

    1. Mark Chapman

      @ We

      It had been weeks since “Bill” mentioned the son — a comment we deleted as soon as we saw it — and you dragged it up Sunday for reasons that only you know. You seem to have some need to use the incident and the boy as some sort of cudgel in your online war. “Bill” had made one pithy post on this thread before you reintroduced that incident. As for Mrs. Watts, she is on the record as part of the campaign, as she volunteered with Mr. Watts at other political events, including elections. She is therefore a public part of the story.

      We would hope Bill, and anyone else, would refrain from mentioning a child, and we will not allow those remarks to stand. But it was you who reintroduced the boy and the weight thing into this unseemly back-and-forth, and now you are outraged. Disingenuous at least.

  10. peter parker


    I find it very interesting that this so called buffoon, incompetent, and money stealing politician has so many people up in arms, because he is running for 137th district state representative. One would think if Watts was so stupid and incompetent there wouldn’t be anything to worry about because he could never win an election.
    All this hubbub can only lead one to assume there is great fear that David Watts just might be able to win the day, otherwise why all the uproar? Could it be that David Watts is just that credible, and that’s why he has many of the status quo afraid? Just maybe Watts fly’s in the face of all the conventional and preconceived notions of what a politician should be? Maybe Watts is just what is needed up in Hartford? Maybe he’s really a good person that cares about his constituents? Maybe he’s the real deal? Maybe he gets results? Maybe he’ll win?
    One things for certain. Watts has a lot of people paying attention.

  11. Bill

    Editor’ note: Enough. There will be no more comments allowed addressing anyone’s weight, parenting skills or children, not by anyone, including the candidate. Parenting, weight issues, children, marital relationships, interpersonal relationships — other than as they pertain to official duties or illegalities — are not public business. Mr. Watts is not the only public servant in this city with such issues, but seems to be the only one being called out for some reason. It ends here for all commenters, all stories.

  12. Bill

    When someone’s employment status, delinquent tax status, and lack of healthy lifestyle is questioned, I think that is fair game. People question Chris Christie’s weight, and rightfully so, why not Mr. Watts?

    1. Mark Chapman


      Because Mr. Christie is not topic on this site. People talk about lots of things elsewhere. We find it objectionable, and we run this site. Employment status, tax status, integrity, residency — all fair topics. Belt size and opinions about parenting? Nope. Not here. Not on our site. End of debate.

  13. Bill

    All that being said, I would much rather have the Chapman’s police my comments than any candidate with a pseudonym that calls something they don’t agree with “hate speech”…keep up the great work Mark, I respect your decisions to do what you want with your own property; this is a free country after all.

    1. Mark Chapman

      @ Bill

      Thank you sir. We agree. With all of that…

  14. LWitherspoon

    The reason “we the people!” aka David Watts keeps bringing up inappropriate comments from weeks ago is that he hopes it will distract people the more legitimate questions swirling around his campaign. Questions such as why Mr. Watts is spending personal funds to rent an apartment in Chris Perone’s district for the purposes of this campaign when he has more than $5500 in unpaid property taxes from 2012 on his home, which isn’t in the district.
    It’s also deeply troubling that Mr. Watts said he wouldn’t make public his “political consulting” clients because he didn’t want those associations to be used against him. What is Mr. Watts hiding? Is it that the clients don’t exist, or is it that they do exist and they are labor unions or labor union PACs? It’s easier to talk about inappropriate comments made weeks ago than to answer the aforementioned questions, which are highly germane to the subject of whether Mr. Watts can effectively represent Norwalk in Hartford.

  15. Bill

    Watts needs to tell us who he “consults” for. If you want our votes, be open and transparent.

  16. One and Done

    @Bill. They all “consult” for one another. We get to pay for all of it. The end product is a state dead last in nearly every indicator for success. The bright side to Watts winning would be his leaving the council, not to mention getting rid of his tax and spend opponent.

Leave a Reply

Recent Comments