Less than a week after a state investigation concluded he violated campaign finance law, political consultant Art Hackney is accusing his opponents on a mining initiative last year of their own campaign abuses.

With the complaint, the big spending on both sides of Ballot Measure 4, the so-called clean water initiative, is under new scrutiny. The measure sought to impose stricter anti-pollution rules on mines, and both supporters and opponents bombarded Alaskans last summer with radio, television and print ads trying to win them over. In August, voters rejected the measure.

Hackney's complaint was filed Monday with the Alaska Public Offices Commission, where staff members are reviewing it to determine if an investigation is in order, said Jerry Anderson, APOC assistant director. He said he couldn't discuss the complaint's substance at this point.

Hackney's complaint targets three organizations: the political group Alaskans Against the Mining Shutdown; the Council of Alaska Producers, made up of mining companies; and NANA Regional Corp. Hackney contends they concealed campaign expenses and contributions until after the election.

As a result, the public didn't learn about $1.3 million in contributions and more than $3 million in spending by the anti-Measure 4 side until long after the campaign was over, Hackney's complaint says. Beyond that, he contends the Council of Alaska Producers failed to properly report more than $5 million that it provided to Alaskans Against the Mining Shutdown.

In all, the new complaint says, the opponents of Ballot Measure 4 spent nearly $13 million, or more than four times the amount raised and spent by measure supporters.

Most of the money for the "No on 4" side came through the council from mining companies based outside the United States, the complaint said. Had the foreign mining companies given directly, that would have created a public perception problem, the complaint said.

In addition, Hackney contends the measure's opponents didn't want the stigma of being a big-money Goliath to supporters' David, so didn't reveal all their spending until year-end reports filed in February.

Much of the debate was framed around the Pebble mine, a multibillion-dollar copper and gold prospect that is controversial due to its location near the headwaters of two rivers that feed Bristol Bay's rich salmon runs.

Representatives of two of the groups being targeted by Hackney said they followed the rules to disclose contributions and spending but didn't want to discuss the substance of the complaint at this early stage.

"I think what we have here is a little bit of tit for tat," said Willis Lyford, managing director of Alaskans Against the Mining Shutdown. "There have been assertions that the other side has, shall we say, run afoul of some of the rules and some of the laws. So they are responding in kind. I guess you'd expect that to happen."

Robin Kornfield, vice president of communications for NANA Development Corporation, said NANA sought guidance from APOC when it got involved in the unfamiliar territory of a political campaign. The huge Red Dog zinc and lead mine near Kotzebue operates on NANA land.

"We sat down with the staff to learn what the rules were, and all the way through we attempted to follow them, which I believe we did," Kornfield said.

Last week, the APOC released the results of a staff investigation that concluded Hackney and others hid the source of about $2 million that went into the pro-Measure 4 effort. That matter still needs to be aired at a hearing, which wasn't scheduled as of Monday.

Bob Gillam, an Anchorage businessman who owns a large home near the Pebble prospect, provided nearly all the money in support of Ballot Measure 4, the APOC found.