Plano City Council member Tom Harrison had plenty of support in his successful court fight to stop a recall referendum on him.

But the identities of nearly all his benefactors remain shrouded in mystery.

The Tom Harrison Legal Expense Trust collected more than $12,000 with 104 donations that ranged between $15 and $1,000. And all but three of the donations on the GoFundMe website are listed as anonymous.

That financial support has raised the question of whether Harrison's donors should be disclosed — either as gifts or campaign donations — under the state law that governs elected officials and is meant to shed light on political influence.

Plano City Council member Tom Harrison defends his post on social media during a hearing on Monday, April 23, 2018 at Plano City Hall. (Ashley Landis / Staff Photographer)

The state's top lawyer faced a similar quandary, but has disclosed the donors to his legal defense.

Harrison hasn't. His most recent campaign finance report, which covers Jan. 1 through July 15, listed no political contributions or expenditures.

Sandy Dixon, one of Harrison's supporters tapped to explain the reasoning on his behalf, said the trust received legal advice that the donations don't need to be reported on any campaign-finance filing.

"These were fees that were raised for a private, personal matter of Tom Harrison," said Dixon, who noted that the money was kept separate from Harrison's officeholder account. "These funds that were raised were to assist him with legal fees not related to his position in office."

But the funds were meant to help save Harrison from being booted out of office before his term expired next May.

A petition, which started after Harrison shared an anti-Islam Facebook post, had set the stage for Plano's first recall election on Nov. 6. Now, the election will be canceled after a district judge found this week that the city used a flawed version of its charter to determine the number of signatures needed to trigger the recall.

Harrison issued a statement after Tuesday's ruling, thanking his supporters and "my attorneys for the time and effort spent defending me."

Charles Sartain, an attorney who specializes in election law, believes the donated funds should be reported as officeholder contributions on a campaign-finance report.

"The council member's suit directly affects his ability to remain in office and thus, certainly appears to be an activity in connection with his office," said Sartain, a partner with the Dallas firm Gray Reed & McGraw.

Dixon's husband, Matt, oversees the trust, which was set up April 5 — the day after the city of Plano received more than 4,400 petition signatures from residents seeking to recall Harrison. Matt Dixon said the money went directly from the fundraising website to the San Antonio area law firm that represented Harrison. The councilman never had access to the funds, Dixon said.

The legal battle was costly for both sides. Through last week, the city has been billed $25,175 by attorney Andy Taylor, who specializes in election law. He has represented Plano since late June when Harrison's attorneys sought emergency relief over the recall petition from the 5th District Court of Appeals in Dallas.

And Plano taxpayers will also be on the hook for the $300-an-hour fee that Harrison's attorneys earned in connection with the district court hearing on Tuesday. The judge awarded them $3,000 in attorneys' fees. Attorney Art Martinez de Vara said Harrison's legal team had already used up all the money from the trust related to the filing in appellate court.

Advisory opinion cited

Campaign finance rules are the jurisdiction of the Texas Ethics Commission. But the commission needs a sworn complaint before a review can start, according to executive director Seana Willing.

She said the commission can't disclose whether it has received any complaints. The outcome of those complaints is also often confidential, she said.

Supporters of Plano City Council member Tom Harrison hold up signs during a specially called public meeting on Feb. 18 at the Plano Municipal Center to discuss Harrison's anti-Islam social media post. (Tom Fox / Staff Photographer)

A 1997 ethics commission advisory opinion found that contributions to a legal defense fund would be considered a political contribution only if the expenses were incurred "in performing a duty or engaging in an activity in connection with the office."

Sandy Dixon said the opinion is justification for Harrison declining to report the funds from the legal trust. She said the funds were not in connection with the councilman's duties in office.

The 1997 opinion goes on to state that even if contributions to a legal defense fund are for personal use, they are considered a benefit under state law. Benefits are also known as gifts. Elected officials are required to report gifts on their personal financial statements unless they fall under certain exceptions.

Dixon said the legal trust wasn't a gift to a public official and was "established for him personally by his friends, family, people that know him that don't think that he should be recalled."

Paxton's decision

At least one elected official has reached a different interpretation. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who was indicted in Collin County in 2015 on fraud charges unrelated to his office, has reported collecting more than $500,000 for his legal defense from family friends. His drawn-out legal battle still has no trial date.

His personal financial statements filed with the Texas Ethics Commission list the donors, their addresses and the amount given. They also include a note identifying the funds as a "gift for legal defense from [a] family friend who meets the independent relationship exception."

Plano resident Sumesh Chopra, who has taken an interest in city issues and signed the recall petition, believes Harrison should be held to the same reporting standard with his Legal Expense Trust.

"Without this money, Tom Harrison wouldn't have been able to fight the recall," he said.

And Chopra doesn't understand why the names need to be kept private anyway.

"I don't think it's a big deal to report who your donors are. Everyone does it," Chopra said. "He should be open and honest about it."