To kick off the morning discussion, we'll shine our Weber County Forum spotlight on a remarkable Scott Schwebke story in this morning's Standard-Examiner. It's remarkable, we believe, because it misses the two main issues of the Envision Ogden/FNURE money laundering scandal, which has been the subject of at least four Std-Ex articles and stories over the past few weeks.
Somewhere along the way, Mr. Schwebke has allowed himself to be distracted by the always highly vocal Godfreyite Mr. Geiger, and has let his reporting be led down an insignificant blind alley.
First, both Mr. Schwebke and Mr. Geieger seem to be entirely missing the main point of the campaign finance ordinances of Ogden City, which are intended to provide a transparent money trail for the lumpencitizens to objectively determine sources and expenditures of campaign donations, and NOT to provide campaign donors some fail-safe protection for their donative campaign contribution expectation interests, like those of Mr. Gullo. Gentle reader Dan S. does a nice job of explaining this issue in a comment under this morning's Std-Ex article:
This article fails to mention the most important difference between Youngberg's contributions and FNURE's:Secondly, and perhaps even more importantly, the Standard has entirely neglected, and the various individuals who've commented on this story have for the most part failed or refused to address what ought to have developed to be the main issue of this story, namely whether it was ethically proper and/or lawful for Boss Godfrey to have "loaned out" the Salomon Center to one political cohort (the Envision Ogden PAC) for what turned out to be a political fundraiser which provided $20 thousand in campaign funds to two other Godfrey cohorts (Eccles and Johnson.)
Youngberg's contributions were completely open and transparent. They were reported on his disclosure statements in a timely manner, and everyone had access to these statements well before the November election.
FNURE was created for the sole purpose of concealing Envision Ogden as the principal source of campaign funds for Johnson and Eccles. It never filed a disclosure statement with anyone, and we still don't know who controlled this "organization". Envision Ogden eventually did file a disclosure statement with the IRS, but that happened several months late, well after the election.
The whole point of campaign finance disclosure laws is to let the voters know who is paying for campaigns. Johnson, Eccles, FNURE, and Envision Ogden apparently consider these laws an annoyance, rather than a legitimate part of a democracy.
Utah Code Section 10-3-1108, which specifically provides that "a municipal officer or employee may not use municipal equipment while engaged in political activity," would suggest that this action may have been a violation of Utah law. Such a violation, of course would be subject to relatively harsh penalties (given the large dollar amount in question), pursuant to the provisions of Utah Code section 10-3-1013.
We find it disappointing to stand by and observe as the Standard-Examiner "takes the bait," and allows its reporting to be diverted to what we deem to be a minor wrinkle in this story at most, as it has done with this morning's Scott Schwebke writeup. Hopefully Mr. Schwebke will soon get back on track.
Follow the money, Scott!
Don't let the cat get your tongues, O Gentle Ones.
