Shellye Davis, the secretary-treasurer of the Connecticut AFL-CIO and a contender to unseat Sen. Doug McCrory (D-Hartford) in the upcoming August primary, has already raised eyebrows by blatantly ignoring a ban on accepting campaign donations from registered lobbyists during the General Assembly session. This move allowed Davis to rake in over $100,000 in public funds handed out by the government for her campaign.
A source recently shared with Yankee Institute a Feb. 21 email from Davis announcing her candidacy for the 2nd District (Windsor, Bloomfield and Hartford). In the email, titled “I’m running,” Davis stated, “I’m excited to share that I’ve officially entered the race.”
“Join me in shaping a future of unity and justice,” wrote Davis. “Your support, whether $5 or $320, will make a difference. Let’s march forward together toward victory.” She included a link to make an online donation yet it is no longer active.
However, starting a campaign amidst potential legal violations is hardly a promising way to begin a bid for public office.
According to the State Elections Enforcement Commission (SEEC), lobbyists campaigning for the General Assembly are prohibited from soliciting and receiving campaign contributions during the legislative session, which ran from Feb. 7 to May 8.
Despite this clear mandate, Davis remained registered as an In-House lobbyist from Jan. 3, 2023, until Feb. 29, 2024, when she eventually terminated her registration nine days after sending her solicitation email. These actions cast doubt on Davis’s commitment to ethical campaigning and suggest a willingness to skirt the rules for political advantage.
Even though Davis officially ended her status as a lobbyist in February, she remained active at the Legislative Office Building (LOB). In addition to her lobbying activities, Davis is a paraeducator in the Hartford public school system and reportedly skipped class on March 6th to testify at the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee Public Hearing on behalf of the CT AFL-CIO. The bill she supported aimed to increase personal income tax marginal rates and establish a capital gains surcharge to fund a child tax credit, a mill rate cap, municipal reimbursements for the cap, and support for certain higher education programs.
After testifying at approximately 11:30 a.m., she did not return to work but instead dined in the cafeteria at 1:23 p.m. (see below). This decision reflects a pattern of disregarding her responsibilities and calls into question her adherence to the standards expected of public officials.
Davis’s campaign is already mired in controversy, as a complaint was filed with the SEEC on July 12. According to Kevin Rennie of the Hartford Courant, a resident from Davis’s town filed the complaint, highlighting that she received 70 contributions totaling $2,640. If these contributions were deemed invalid, Davis would have fallen short of the $17,300 required to qualify for the Citizens’ Election Program (CEP), which provides financing to eligible candidates for statewide offices.
The CEP is primarily funded by the sale of abandoned property in the state’s custody and voluntary donations.
The complaint against Davis underscores a serious issue: she signed an application for public grant dollars from the CEP, certifying that she understood the requirement to “read, understand, and comply with the requirements of the Program [CEP], including all applicable statutes, regulations, and/or declaratory rulings.”
Furthermore, Davis certified that she understood failing to comply with these requirements could lead to penalties imposed by the SEEC). She also acknowledged her responsibility to have “general knowledge and oversight of the actions and conduct” of her candidate committee, including awareness of contributions made to the committee and funds deposited into her authorized depository account.
By signing the application, Davis accepted personal liability for any violations of the program’s requirements by herself, her agents, or anyone acting under her direction.
Among the list of questionable donations to the Davis campaign are from donors including former CT AFL-CIO President Lori Pelletier, who contributed $100; Jody Barr, Executive Director of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), who gave $100; Carl Chisem, President of the Connecticut Employees Union Independent (CEUI), who contributed $25; and John DiSette of the Administrative and Residual Employees Union (A&R), who donated $50.
With their backgrounds, these individuals should have been fully aware of the state’‘s strict lobbying ethics rules, making their contributions all the more concerning.
A spokesperson from SEEC was not able to give a statement as it is the office’s policy not to discuss cases currently under investigation, but they did provide a PDF copy of the complaint.
The controversies surrounding Davis’s campaign for the Connecticut State Senate paint a troubling picture of a candidate who seems more inclined to bend rules than uphold them. Her actions — from accepting questionable donations to ignoring lobbying restrictions — reflect a pattern of behavior that undermines the principles of transparency and accountability that voters expect from public officials.
As the primary race in Connecticut’s 2nd District unfolds, voters are faced with important questions about the integrity and ethical leadership of those seeking office. The controversies surrounding the Davis’s campaign cast a shadow over her candidacy and raise questions about her commitment to the values of “unity and justice” she claims to champion.
