Campaign Finance/Disclosure Reports are out for the 32 Day Pre Primary, and the July Periodic.
Since we are all about not being political at Town Board meetings - it is IMPERATIVE that you review the disclosure reports to see who donated to what campaigns and if anyone on these reports go up to speak at Public Input - we can accuse them of being political. Correct? Ok then, on to the reports! :)
MJD 32 Day Pre Primary 2011
MJD July Periodic 2011
Perticone July Periodic 2011
Aldersley Nothing for 2011
Moore and Nottell 32 Day Pre Primary 2011
Moore and Nottell July Periodic 2011
Ament 2 No Activity Filed and 1 Terminated
24 comments:
I have to believe Mr.Moore regrets that $250 check he wrote to MJD in Marcht the Yacht Club shindig.
He likely didn't know she would be so self serving.
Also looks like Aldersley and Perticone have failed to file. Even if they have no activity to report they need to state so.
Must be nice to get a cross endorsement.
How about those signs?
Mary Joyce, John & Stephanie.
Who knew?
anonymous @ 7:14 -
lol I wonder.....
Maybe he doesn't mind that check - he might want her (as an R) to be Supervisor.
anonymous @ 7:18 -
I couldn't find anything for Aldersley - that one committee is listed as inactive (and I couldn't find any others) and there has been no activity since 2009....yeah....must be nice indeed!
You wouldn't have happened to notice if they (MJD, John, & Stephanie) were collecting signatures together, would you? Anyone see them together going door to door?
I have not seen them.
Also, it looks like the Fire House Chats weren't very well planned.
I guess when you take re-election for granted these kind of things will happen.
Anonymous @ 7:35 -
I hear ya!
Have fun voting for Supervisor! You have the choice of....uh....well, there is no choice. Not for the Primary, and not for the General Elections.
It's really unfortunate that there is no choice for Supervisor.
At least people have a choice for Town Board.....thanks to Mr. Moore and Mr. Nottell.
A friend of mine said her elderly Aunt got an absentee ballot for the Primary, and she was so confused because it listed Aldersley and Perticone on there as Republicans...she kept asking "Why are they on here? They are Democrats, aren't they?"
A lot of people still don't understand this cross endorsement....let alone approve of it.
Hopefully, this won't happen again (if the committees decide to do their jobs).
I looked at the list of active filers and Stephanie Aldersley is not on there. MJD, Perticone, Moore, and Nottell are all listed.
If she's not an active filer - can she be on the ballot?
Isn't there some sort of "issue" with her not filing, even if there is no activity? Like - isn't it a violation or something? Election Law?
Am I wrong in assuming that?
Ok, this link on the NYSBOE - Campaign Finance FAQ's - it says:
Q: No-Activity Report - If I have not had any campaign activity during a report period, do I need to file a report? If so, what and how do I file?
A: Yes, you still have to file. All candidates and/or registered committees are required to file January and July periodic reports until termination. Primary, General and Special Election filing requirements are triggered by candidate/committee activity. If the candidate/committee has had no activity, (i.e., receipts and/or expenditures, such as interest, dividends and bank charges) during any required reporting period, the candidate/committee is still required to file, in this instance a No-Activity Report. This report can be filed on the NYSBOE website using their Filer ID# and PIN or on paper using the Termination or Resignation Request Form/No-Activity Report Form CF-18.
I am assuming that by not filing anything at all, she is in violation of NYS Election Law. There should be a penalty for that, right?
Also, I did a blog a while back about Morelle and him not having "paid for by" on a mailer of his...and I wondered if the taxpayers paid for it or something. Anyways, I made a correction on the actual blog because someone told me that he couldn't do that, that it's illegal etc. - but I also found an answer on this FAQ page. It says:
Q: "Paid for By" - When does a campaign have to use the term "paid for by ..." in political advertisements?
A: NYS Election Law does not require attribution, where the sponsor's or payor's name is on any political advertisements ("paid for by"). However, if the ad refers to a federal candidate, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) does impose such a requirement. Additionally, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations, radio/TV stations, and print media themselves, may impose an attribution requirement. Please consult with these appropriate federal authorities or media outlets for further information.
Just thought I'd mention that again and show the answer from NYSBOE so I don't get accused of anything.....again.
I'm so sorry - I made a mistake in saying that there is no challenge for Supervisor - I believe Mr. Ament has collected enough signatures, and is an active filer.
My apologies!
I dont believe Mr Moore regrets his check at all. I believe Mr Moore (and the rest of the committee) knew exactly what they were doing while they (behind the scenes) pushed Mr Moore into running against the 2 Democrats. If they really felt strongly about "having a real choice" then there would be a "real choice" for supervisor too.
While watching the tb mtg Mr Moore is even sitting next to the ever dozing Mr Darizio. (lmao)
Regarding public input, in the town law it may speak about keeping input relevent to the agenda or town business but couldnt one argue that campaigning IS town business? Especially when there has never been something as ridiculous as this cross endorsement before?!!! I do not recall any other supervisor (in the past) telling people what they could or could not say at the podium and all of this by the administration that said they wouldnt even "limit public input" sheesh, how soon they forget.
Anonymous, I know for sure that the Republican committee did not push Mr. Moore into running. Actually, many of them aren't happy with him.
He wasn't happy with the cross endorsement idea and broke away from the Republican committee to run. Totally against what his party was telling him to do.
That is the truth, you can believe what you want to.
A Democrat from the committee could have just as easily broken off as a candidate to run against MJD. Instead they stood rank and file and listened to what Morelle was telling them to do. Total WIMPS!
Anonymous said - -"Regarding public input, in the town law it may speak about keeping input relevent to the agenda or town business but couldnt one argue that campaigning IS town business? Especially when there has never been something as ridiculous as this cross endorsement before?!!! I do not recall any other supervisor (in the past) telling people what they could or could not say at the podium and all of this by the administration that said they wouldnt even "limit public input" sheesh, how soon they forget."
Totally agree with you! I don't remember a supervisor (in the past) telling people what they could or could not say at the podium.
I'm pretty dismayed and worried about open government in Irondequoit. :(
Irondequoit has become the joke of the county. Leaders say they work well together and believe the people do not deserve to make the choice. The work-together is really in back room deals to cheat the residents. Officials give donors 40% reductions in commercial assessments.
The endless lies.
Party leaders obediently marched getting signatures and must now be proud of the new lawn signs.
Evil brings profit.
we shall agree to disagree about the repub committee. I know several members who were not at all happy with endorsing 2 dems. While the committee as a whole didnt want to piss off its county counterpart behind the scenes some were scrambling to figure out how to change this travesty. (not all comm members but some) Hence what we have now and with support by the way of some of the comm members.
I can also tell you that while some of the members are publicly supporting this ridiculous new event behind the scenes they are getting the word out to support the 2 republicans and will vote accordingly.
word has it that a) Perticone and Aldersley were NOT invited to speak at the repub comm mtg for support (as Daurizio was) and b) many comm members were furious about them being invited to the following repub fundraiser. c) while a letter went out to dems regarding cross endorsement with all 3 of their signatures the same letter did not go out to republicans.
I couldnt agree more though with being worried and disappointed at the direction this town is heading regarding open government. I wish I had saved the article in the post where the 3 new republicans stated they would not limit public input to 3 minutes and they would allow for more input from everyone. I havent seen that, have you?
Anonymous, I didn't know that Perticone and Aldersley weren't allowed to speak at the Republican meeting. Do you happen to know if MJD spoke at the Democrat meeting?
I was also under the impression that the letter that the 3 signed regarding cross endorsement went to all committee members Repub and Dem.
I would love to be able to find that article now. I wish we could. I remember reading that but I don't remember where.
They were all for more input prior to election. Oh, how times have changed. There sure hasn't been more input and it seems like some of them are trying to come up with ways to not have input.
Election preview article, MPN, Oct.23, 2009 - MJD was asked -Most new development that is proposed meets heated opposition; how could this be mitigated?
She answered -
"Opposition occurs in most communities. I would organize meetings to discuss problems and concerns of residents in a forum that would NOT restrict time for input. Together, the residents and developer would examine what present zoning allows, how the proposal will affect the community both positively and negatively, and what opportunities for compromise can be reached, etc. We will work toward consensus and use every effort to bring the process to a successful conclusion."
(((WHAT?)))This is the opposite of how they have handled the Titus Avenue Legacy project so far. They didn't even show the public pictures/plans before or during the TB presentation.
I am so sick of politician's regardless of party affiliation saying one thing and doing another.
Where is Ray McDonald when you need him?
lol anonymous @3:13 -
He's probably playing Russian roulette and walking on eggshells down Newport Road with Robert Ewing of the DEC.
Or, doing campaign work for MJD.
Cheri-
Here's the article you were looking for - it was in I-Post and it said the letter went out to Democratic Committee Members - nothing about the Republican Committee Members.
Link to article.
The Town's departments are in shambles. Mary Joyce was so worried about it when it affected her and her husband's business interests before. Now that she is on the inside I guess she sees it differently.
@ Cheri - not only were they not invited to speak they werent invited to the meeting. I am told that yes MJD WAS invited to the meeting and WAS invited to speak at the county dem comm mtg.
Regarding the letter signed by all 3, it did NOT go out to the republicans for some reason or another.
Something stinks about this whole thing. Can anyone believe anyone running for government anymore? Are other towns as bad as this?
PS Cheri has she organized ANY mtg to discuss openly citizens concerns? Has she tried to meet with the residents along Titus as she has with the developer? I dont know as I dont live there but it sure doesnt sound like it. As a matter of fact there was another firehouse mtg scheduled for tonight, any word on whether it actually took place???
Jax, thank you for the article and the Russian Roulette/Newport reference still makes me laugh. I remember that blog. haha
Anonymous, I am surprised that the letter didn't go out to both parties. Hmmmm.
I don't think there have been any meetings with the Titus area residents. One of the public input speakers even mentioned how they haven't even seen a drawing and how they had to make up their own website. The speaker made a great comparison to how the cell tower was being handled compared to the rezoning application.
Very early on regarding the rezoning I spoke with MJD and asked her to meet with the neighborhood and discuss everything. I really thought that was going to happen. Never did.
As far as the firehouse chat I don't know if that did happen or not tonight but I'm working on finding out. I'll let you know.
I've looked and looked and looked, and I can't find anything about not limiting public input to 3 minutes.
The only "time restriction" comment I read was the Q&A in MPN with her where she said:
"Q: Most new development that is proposed meets heated opposition; how could this be mitigated?
A: Opposition occurs in most communities. I would organize meetings to discuss problems and concerns of residents in a forum that would not restrict time for input. Together, the residents and developer would examine what present zoning allows, how the proposal will affect the community both positively and negatively, and what opportunities for compromise can be reached, etc. We will work toward consensus and use every effort to bring the process to a successful conclusion."
hmmmm, how is that working out?i think people in power ought to take all of their flyers, mailers, articles, tapes of quotes, etc, etc to work with them so they do not FORGET what they promise/pledge
Barb isn't in this week so I'm not sure about the Firehouse chat. :(
Trying to find out what is on the agenda for the special TB meeting on Sept. 8th now.
I give up, Ray.
Where are you?
Who needs you?
Spill it.
Anonymous @ 10:13 -
I'm just a tad confused on what insignificant Ray has to do with anything?
Can you expand a little more on it?
Am I missing something obvious?
Post a Comment