GREENSBORO, NC -- Earlier today I wrote a post about in-kind campaign contributions made to some city council candidates by Marti Kotis who owns a billboard company. The contributions were of ads on billboard's owned by Kotis's company.
It was hasty to label those contributions as illegal, as I did in my headline. "Questionable" would have been a better word. Questions remain about why two of the three candidates did not report the contributions on their latest financial reports; about why Kotis is saying that invoices are only generated after 30 days, yet one candidate listed the donation and two did not; and it is unclear to me how someone can donate the resources of their company to a candidate but claim it was from them personally.
Nonetheless, unanswered questions are not evidence and, until those questions are answered, I should not have jumped to the conclusion that the lack of documentation substantiates illegality.
I called the Board of Elections (twice) and spoke to Brenda Wallace, in consultation with the State Board of Elections, she told me to wait until I got a statement. The report cut off was before the end of the month. She told me to list it on the next report. I am sure that she will confirm our discussion.
ReplyDeleteNancy Vaughan
Roch-
ReplyDeleteTony estimated the value and chose to include that in his report. There is nothing nefarious here.
MK
Invoices from the billboard company to you accompanied by copies of your personal checks paying those invoices would be irrefutable proof.
ReplyDeleteAnd, to be clear, that would clear up the question of a corporate donation. It does not ameliorate the matter of Johnson, Wilkins and Vaughan accepting such a donation while they are taking official action on a matter of financial benefit to the donor. That just stinks and really is of the lowest ethical standards, no matter how barely legal.
ReplyDeleteRoch-
ReplyDeleteSo you think the 9-0 council decision with full staff approval was somehow because of political contributions? How was their decision inconsistent with any decision they've made in the past on similar matters.
If you're going to accuse me or council of being unethical - be prepared to prove it.
I consider your statements to be false, causing harm, and made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statements.
Marty Kotis
What statements, specifically, are false?
ReplyDeleteThey include, but are not limited to:
ReplyDelete"illegal corporate contributions"
"label those contributions as illegal, as I did in my headline"
"leading him to run afoul of elections laws"
"he adorned some properties he owns with giant Mitt Romney signs in violation of Greensboro's sign ordinance"
"That just stinks and really is of the lowest ethical standards, no matter how barely legal."
You made those false statements. I believe posting them on your blog and Blog aggregator causes harm to my reputation. And you made those statements without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statements.
"illegal corporate contributions"
ReplyDeleteI have already acknowledge that was premature.
"label those contributions as illegal, as I did in my headline"
Same as above.
"leading him to run afoul of elections laws"
Accurate with oversized sings, remains to be seen with contributions.
""he adorned some properties he owns with giant Mitt Romney signs in violation of Greensboro's sign ordinance"
That's accurate.
"That just stinks and really is of the lowest ethical standards, no matter how barely legal."
Also accurate.
"label those contributions as illegal, as I did in my headline"
ReplyDeleteThe complete phrase was: "It was hasty to label those contributions as illegal, as I did in my headline."
Are you saying that is false? That is wasn't hasty?
I did not install any oversized Romney signs on my properties. I gave the Republican party permission to install legal signs some properties.
ReplyDeleteYour barely legal comment conflicts with your illegal comment.
A more prudent person than you would ask for a ruling from the BOE before making such claims and defaming someone. By the way, I'm not running for office, nor do I file election reports.
You've seen Nancy's post above about her conversations with the BOE and yet you still stick to your entrenched and incorrect positions. You continue to keep the false statements on your blog including the "illegal" comments.
Now I believe you have crossed another threshold - reckless disregard for the truth.
I cannot continue to engage someone who distorts my words in order to argue against something I did not say. Because of that, I'll have to disengage now but I will repeat my encouragement for you to make public the invoices from the billboard company and record of your payment for them.
ReplyDeleteHow did I distort your words? You didn't claim that I had violated election laws or done something illegal?
ReplyDeleteYou keep accusing me of violating election laws. Again, I cannot make it any clearer - I am not running for office - I do not file election reports. I did not put up any large Romney signs. What part of that do you not understand?
If you think I've done something illegal - call the BOE, call the DA, call the zoning commission. Call whoever you want. But don't sit there and say I've done something illegal or violated a law when I haven't.
Roch-
ReplyDeleteWhich candidates are you supporting in the council races? Have you worked on anyone's campaigns?
Marty
I don't know Marty but from people on the street he seems to be an ok guy, Roch is also an ok guy who fights for justice in his own way of blogging, and speaking public on issues close to his heart.
ReplyDeleteI understand the point that if someone does business with the city on large scales that they be careful during election season because things may look bad, even if it was not meant to be.
I also respect MK and his desire for facts to be correct, that's fair and Roch is doing the best he can to get the facts out, it is up to the public to put it all together and form their viewpoint.
I hate the whole fighting thing because jobs and taxes will come with this project, maybe if an impact report is released and MK on good faith stops the sign thing, maybe we can get back on track.
The city has issues that we need to address, jobs, taxes, street names, GPAC, Museum loans, public information issues.
Lets all sit down and talk it out, maybe MK can get me a spot on the bill board after the Darryl add because the add looks good, made me hungry.
Lets come together and work things out.
One more time, Marty, if you want to continue after this, we'll have to do it over a cup of coffee.
ReplyDelete"You keep accusing me of violating election laws."
No, I labeled, once, your contributions of billboard space to candidates voting on matters of financial benefit to you illegal. I've since changed that and clarified that using that word was hasty before all the facts were known.
"Which candidates are you supporting in the council races? Have you worked on anyone's campaigns?"
I have a Ben Holder sign in my yard. I am not working on anyone's campaigns, and if I were, I would not do it by "donating" the resources of my company to them under the guise of making a personal contribution.
So, let's be clear: I labeled something illegal that only "may" be illegal and corrected and clarified that; I expressed my opinion that a donation (of any kind) to candidates from someone who is seeking public financial largess to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars for his direct benefit, exhibits poor ethics standards (more so for the candidates, who have a public trust to maintain); and I acknowledged the good things you do and have done for this community.
You are welcome to add additional commentary if you wish but, as I wrote, if you want anymore response from me, we can have a cup of coffee.
Sure - let's grab a cup of coffee or beer sometime, because I don't think I've been able to make you understand the facts here. My office number is 574-2000.
ReplyDelete