Wednesday, September 24, 2014
What these candidates are not telling us in their financial disclosure forms
by Larry Geller
Why me, I sometimes ask myself. Why do I have to post this stuff? Well, because likely no one else will.
Readers should know how often lawmakers (or lawmaker candidates) themselves break or ignore the laws. Posting errors online in financial disclosure may, who knows, result in either better compliance or better oversight by the Ethics Commission. Yeah, in my dreams. But we plod along…
Is there really a problem?
If 64 percent of candidates for elected office even disregard the filing deadline, then perhaps the law isn’t working very well. Yes, with numbers like that, there is a problem.
Or perhaps voters should note who follows the law and who doesn’t. In this case, we voters are entitled to see this information. The early filing deadline gives us time to check out the candidates.
Last year I tracked three legislators who filed incorrect forms. As I checked in during the year, it became clear that there was no correction, and probably wasn’t going to be on. So it unfolded. Or didn’t unfold, which is the issue. That is: filing forms is required, but if no one looks at them to take corrective action, what does that tell us? Hmmm??
Here’s the key to the Financial Amount Code:
A Less than $1,000
B At least $1,000 but less than $10,000
C At least $10,000 but less than $25,000
D At least $25,000 but less than $50,000
E At least $50,000 but less than $100,000
F At least $100,000 but less than $150,000
G At least $150,000 but less than $250,000
H At least $250,000 but less than $500,000
I At least $500,000 but less than $750,000
J At least $750,000 but less than $1,000,000
K At least $1,000,000 or more
First up: Brickwood Galuteria omits the description of services he rendered.
Ok, we can figure out the first one. But what exactly did he do for the Pacific Center for Economic Development? How do we know that there is not a potential conflict of interest there? This is why “services rendered” is a required response.
As usual, we include the signature block which acknowledges that the information is true, correct and complete:
Now, this omission is easily fixed. Will it be? If it isn’t, will the Ethics Commission apply penalties? Not for something this “minor” one might think. So, when?
Marcus Oshiro is missing the list of stocks in his investment portfolios
The list of stocks could reveal a conflict of interest, so it should be submitted.
Finally, Mark Hashem is missing the addresses under Item 2 of his ownership or business interests
Manini, yeah, maybe, but incorrect anyway.
Keep this exciting information coming, folks.
Links to this post: