FREMONT, Ohio — Days after TiffinOhio.net reported that Sandusky County Judge Brad Smith appeared to have accepted campaign contributions through a personal Venmo account, a Defiance man filed formal complaints with two Ohio regulatory bodies alleging the conduct violated state campaign finance law.
Charles Tingler of Defiance filed a public complaint with the Ohio Election Integrity Commission, which operates under the Ohio Secretary of State’s Public Integrity Division, and a separate grievance with the Ohio State Bar Association’s Certified Grievance Committee. Both filings are dated May 1, 2026.
The complaints center on publicly visible transaction records on a Venmo account operating under the handle @BuckeyeBradSmith, which received payments with memos explicitly identifying them as campaign contributions. On April 8, 2026, Charles Yamarone sent a payment with the description “Campaign contribution: BS4Judge.” The same day, Adam Greenslade sent a payment described as “B Smitty for Judge.” A third payment from Stacey Gibson is dated March 25, 2026. The same account also shows personal transactions, including payments for Ohio State football tickets and kart racing entry fees.
TiffinOhio.net reported on the Venmo transactions and their apparent conflict with Ohio campaign finance law after a review of publicly visible records on the @BuckeyeBradSmith account. Smith did not respond to a request for comment submitted by reporter Dave Miller before a noon May 1, 2026 deadline.
Ohio Revised Code §3517.10(D)(3)(a) requires campaign committees to deposit all monetary contributions into an account separate from any personal or business account of the candidate. The Ohio Elections Commission addressed the issue directly in Advisory Opinion 2021ELC-04, issued December 16, 2021, concluding that peer-to-peer payment platforms such as Venmo are permissible under Ohio law only when the account is established specifically for the campaign committee and kept entirely separate from any personal account of a beneficiary of the campaign fund. The opinion states that receiving campaign contributions into a personal Venmo account before transferring them to a campaign account is not acceptable under Ohio campaign finance law.
The complaint filed with the Ohio Election Integrity Commission enumerates 7 alleged violations. Counts 1 and 2 allege Smith violated R.C. §3517.10(D)(3)(a) and Advisory Opinion 2021ELC-04 by receiving campaign contributions through an account that also reflected personal transactions. Count 3 alleges the campaign treasurer failed to maintain the strict accounting of contributions required under R.C. §3517.10(D)(2). Counts 4 and 5 allege that if the Venmo contributions were omitted, understated, or incorrectly reported, the campaign violated the itemized reporting requirements of R.C. §3517.10(A) and §3517.10(B) and the accurate filing requirements of R.C. §3517.13(B), (C), and (D). Count 6 alleges potential knowing concealment or misrepresentation of contributions under R.C. §3517.13(G)(1). Count 7 alleges that if any campaign finance filing knowingly omitted or misstated the Venmo contributions, the filing may constitute election falsification under R.C. §3599.36 — a fifth-degree felony.
The Bar Association grievance raises additional concerns specific to Smith’s status as a sitting judge. The filing alleges potential violations of Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct Rules 1.1, 1.2, and 4.4, which require judges to comply with the law, act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary, and handle judicial campaign contributions in accordance with applicable rules. The grievance also cites Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct Rules 8.4(b), 8.4(c), 8.4(d), and 8.4(h), which prohibit conduct involving dishonesty or misrepresentation, illegal acts reflecting adversely on honesty or trustworthiness, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, and conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law.
Tingler’s complaint requests that the Ohio Election Integrity Commission obtain the full Venmo records for @BuckeyeBradSmith, all campaign bank records for the relevant election cycle, all campaign finance reports filed by Smith’s committee, and any records showing whether contributions were transferred to a separate campaign account. The complaint also requests that the Commission refer the matter for criminal investigation if evidence shows knowing concealment, misrepresentation, or election falsification, and refer any judicial ethics issues to the appropriate disciplinary authority.
The complaints are allegations. Neither the Ohio Election Integrity Commission nor the Ohio State Bar Association’s Certified Grievance Committee has made any findings in this matter. Smith has not publicly addressed the allegations. He serves as judge of the Sandusky County Court of Common Pleas, Probate and Juvenile Division, a position he has held since 2009. TiffinOhio.net’s prior reporting documented a $33,300 state audit finding against Smith that was formally abated by Sandusky County Prosecutor Beth Tischler with no repayment required.
