Another Spokane County Democratic Party chair resigns

Three months ago, Steven McCray II, newly elected as head of the Spokane County Democratic Party, committed to get a better handle on party finances, more productively mediate conflict, and work to unite an organization often plagued by generational infighting.

On Sunday, he emailed his resignation letter to Vice Chair Matthew Sorey, as did four executive officers McCray had appointed, amid accusations of personal attacks, self-dealing and a lack of financial transparency.

McCray had been elected to replace former Chair Naida Spencer, who resigned in September after her leadership had become embroiled in personal conflict that worsened already fragile relationships between the party’s old guard and a more progressive wing embodied by the local Young Democrats.

Spencer had said she was removing herself from leadership so the conflicts for which she had been the flash point could cool, yet she was almost immediately appointed by McCray – who is her boyfriend – to serve as the party’s director of operations.

Other McCray appointees who resigned Sunday – Treasurer Christie Buckley, Secretary Michaela Kelso and endorsements committee Chair Joseph Ghodsee – also largely represented Spencer’s wing of the party. Buckley had attempted to rally the troops during a dispute between Spencer and Sorey that precipitated Spencer’s resignation.

In an interview, Spencer said McCray had asked her to come back into leadership just long enough to help with the transition, but that she planned to depart once McCray felt he had his footing.

“And they started coming after me immediately,” Spencer said.

A series of grievances were filed against Spencer, which neither she nor current party leadership would specify but which Spencer believes were vindictive. When the party’s grievance committee recommended disciplinary actions against Spencer, McCray declined to take action.

Then came the anonymous donor.

Not long after McCray was elected party chair, an anonymous donor pledged to match up to $10,000 of donations made to the party between Nov. 20 and Dec. 20, a common tactic to try to juice political spending. After 30 days, the promised match had drummed up a little more than $5,100 of outside donations, which when matched by the anonymous donor meant about $10,000 would flow into the party’s coffers, not chump change for an organization that raised around $100,000 in all of 2025.

Then the donor asked for a refund.

Though the party was not legally required to honor a refund request, Sorey and several other members in leadership only learned the donor requested their money back after the refund already had been approved.

“There was an executive board meeting where, in the treasurer’s report, it was slipped in there that we gave a $5,000 refund to the anonymous matching donor,” said Sorey, who was the party’s second-in-command at the time. “I personally was not informed who the anonymous donor was and it was made clear by Steven that the donor wanted to remain anonymous.”

This sent a ripple of confusion and outrage through the party, or at least through the faction already mistrustful of McCray. Who was this anonymous donor? Why had they demanded their money back? Had McCray informed the other donors who gave their money with the expectation that it would be doubled?

“Some folks on the board were demanding answers about that, and my interpretation was that the questions got so loud for the people who were expected to answer those questions that they quit instead of answering them,” said Logan Camporeale, a member of the party’s executive board.

Filings with the state Public Disclosure Commission, however, do show someone initially made a roughly $5,100 donation to the Spokane County Democrats on Dec. 20, the end of the matching period: Naida Spencer.

Spencer acknowledged the contribution in an interview. “I made the donation, but the same week I made the donation, people in the party had done some actions which means I have to go through the courts and defend myself, so I removed my money so I can hire a lawyer.”

Spencer declined to specify what those actions were, saying only that a case would be forthcoming.

She described a party burdened by its expansive board, which has 28 officer positions, and a faction of ungrateful, toxic members who gummed up the gears under her leadership and McCray’s.

“They wanted more titles without having earned them. They wanted to be on committees while being toxic to work with … if they don’t feel like they’re getting what they deserve, the way the executive board is organized, they can make your life a living hell,” Spencer said. “In order to get any work accomplished, the board has to approve it, and it’s a massive board … it’s too large to not get bogged down by personalities, sometimes.”

“I’m sad and I’m grieving,” she added. “A lot of what I feel like I had built and accomplished with the amazing people that worked under me has the potential to go away and turn to ash. So I just have to trust the will of the (precinct officers) to do right by the organization.”

McCray accused “certain individuals on the executive board” of taking “actions” that posed “significant risks to my family members who are in the country on green cards,” and raised unspecified concerns about “financial irregularities” in the time between when Spencer stepped down and his election which he wrote were being investigated by the state Public Disclosure Commission.

The only outstanding complaint being investigated by the PDC appears to have been filed in January by serial complainant Conner Edwards, alleging some September and October filings had been submitted late. Remaining party members said they didn’t knew what McCray was referring to regarding risks to his family.

“Additionally, ongoing personal grievances against myself and the former chair have hindered our ability to conduct business effectively,” McCray wrote. “Despite my efforts to resolve these conflicts, it has become clear that those holding these grievances are unwilling to prioritize the party’s interests.”

McCray largely declined to comment further, saying he didn’t want “internal issues with the party to be brought out into the public,” but that he wished future leadership the best of luck.

Sorey, who was made acting chair after Spencer resigned and is now again after McCray’s departure wants the party to move on.

“There’s no reason to dwell on this situation,” he said Wednesday. “There’s a lot of hope. We feel there’s a chance to stabilize this and maintain momentum going into the midterms, because we know we need to capitalize on this moment.”

Sorey still faces a DUI charge from a September arrest, when the Washington State Patrol reported Sorey’s blood alcohol content as 0.14. The legal limit for driving in Washington is 0.08. The next scheduled hearing in the case is next month.

While the county party’s immediate crisis in many ways resembles its 2020 implosion under then-Chair Ed Wood, there is at least one key difference: While McCray’s appointees resigned en masse, most of the organization’s leadership remains.

“Yes, there were a number of resignations, but this is not every elected officer quitting,” Camporeale said. “Four out of five are eager to keep doing this work.”

According to the organization’s bylaws, the party will need to hold an election for a new chair within 30 days of McCray’s departure.