The Maine Republican Party today filed an ethics complaint against a local Democratic House candidate, claiming a “serious violation” of the state’s Clean Elections Act.

Robert Sezak, 58, of Fairfield, who is a publicly-financed candidate under the act, violated state law by including a discount offer to his bookstore inside a campaign brochure left at local homes, the complaint alleges. Sezak owns the store Re-Books in Waterville.

The complaint, filed by Waterville attorney Daniel Billings on behalf of the Republican party, requests that the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices determine whether Sezak’s public funding should be revoked.

Contacted this evening, Sezak said he did not know about the complaint.

“I need to talk to the ethics commission,” Sezak said. “I haven’t heard anything from the ethics commission, so I really don’t have any thoughts about it. I don’t believe the brochure is in violation of the clean elections law.”

Sezak is the Democratic candidate for House District 84, which includes Fairfield, Rome and Smithfield. Also running for the seat are Republican John Picchiotti, and independents Aaron Rowden and Paul Tessier.

Picchiotti, contacted this evening, said he also knew nothing about the complaint or its allegations.

“I know Robert very well; we’re all in town and serve on committees,” Picchiotti said. “It’s probably something he’s totally unaware of. He wouldn’t do anything intentionally.”

According to the complaint, a resident of Rome arrived home on Oct. 20 and found Sezak’s campaign brochure in his door.

“Inside the brochure was a business card for Mr. Sezak’s business Re-Books,” the complaint states. “Handwritten on the back of the card was the following: ‘Present this card for 20% off your next purchase!”

The complaint goes onto to cite state law under the Clean Elections Act, which says candidates “must limit … campaign expenditures and obligations, including outstanding obligations, to the revenues distributed to the candidate from the fund and may not accept any contributions unless specifically authorized by the commission.” The definition of a “contribution” includes a “gift, subscription, loan, advance or deposit of money or anything of value made for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of any person” to office.

“Mr. Sezak is using discounts from purchases at his business ‘for the purpose of influencing’ his election to state office,” the complaint states. “The discounts are a thing of value. This activity constitutes both a contribution to his campaign and an expenditure on behalf of his campaign.”

The complaint cites state law that says the candidate’s public financing may be revoked if the ethics commission determines the candidate “knowingly” accepted such contributions.

“In addition, if Mr. Sezak is reimbursing himself for mileage from his campaign account for trips on which he distributes his business card, he may be misusing (clean election) funds by promoting his business with public funds,” the complaint states.

The ethics commission is scheduled to meet next on Oct. 28.

The complaint requests that “the commission staff engage in sufficient preliminary fact-finding before the next commission meeting to allow the commission to consider this matter before the election.”