If you did not hear on 1370 WSPD or on Fox 36, the Toledo Free Press will be tackling Lucas County Democrats who violate party bi-laws by contributing to non-endorsed democrats. Some of the questions that were asked were if the D's allow them to violate the contributions without sanctions, then the party is a party of men, not rules. It appears to be broken down on A and B team again, proving that the party unity does not really exist. Everyone will be watching what the party does.
Also, questions were raised regarding Toledo Federation of Teachers contributions in what appears to be funneling of money-TFT donating money to other candidates which in turn give money to school board candidates. Could this be the same wink and nod donations that got Noe in trouble?
TFT Union leaders did not return Free Press calls.
We will get the details in the upcoming issue of the Toledo Free Press.
hooo boy, there goes the sweeping under the rug.
They did this with the steamplant. They hype how there's all this drama which was going on, but afforded the "Economic Director" to publish a column defending his actions and affording Bill a chance to lipstick his steamplant pig with softball questions and compassionate embrace.
Look where that got us, Mike.
Anyone find out when they actually APPLIED for those tax credits? nope. Maybe it was when Carty called them on the carpet, perhaps?
No, the same thing is going to happen here, folks. A bunch of pretty lights and soft caresses.
Nothing but face time to sell ads.
The article is BS. They don't bother to mention why HB 694 was ruled unconstitutional or that the provision the TFT supposedly violated wasn't in the bill when it was signed into law. It was inserted in a 33 page "ammendment" that was sent to the A.G. after the bill had already been signed by Taft.
? That should provide more concern about this whole mess.
http://swampbubbles.com/steven-steel-proves-he-does-only-work-those-who-...
Actually, the court was asked to determine if the law was passed in accordance with proper procedures as determined in the Ohio constitution. Yes there was an insertion to "correct" the bill. Insertions have been standard practice but not to the extent used here. Further HB 119 was later passed to correct the problem. The AG has challenged the court ruling and has strongly stated the decision will be appealed. And of course, they could always pass it again as the content of the law was not being challenged - the process was.
In addition, the TFP never said anybody did anything wrong - HB 694 is still the law pending a ruling on the AG's motion to dismiss. Their emphasis was on the process - they exposed business as usual in Toledo. The fact they did not go into the details of HB 694 does not make the story B.S.
From Judge John Bender"s DECISION GRANTING MOTION OF UNION PLAINTIFFS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNTS X, XI AND XII:
"Stated in general terms, these counts allege that the procedures set forth in the Ohio Constitution to enact laws were not followed, and that as a result H.B. 694 is void, i.e., that it is not a law at all."
Additionally, "This court has been asked to declare that an equal branch of government has exceeded the authority granted it by the people through the Constitution."
Finally, "A challenge to a statute’s constitutionality will only be decided if it is absolutely necessary to resolve the case. If one interpretation of a statute would render it valid and another invalid, a court should adopt the favorable interpretation to bring the act into harmony with the Constitution. Before a court can declare a statute unconstitutional “it must appear beyond a reasonable doubt that the legislation and constitutional provisions are clearly incompatible."
With these principles firmly in mind, the court must compare the steps that were followed to enact H.B. 694 with the procedures to enact laws that the people of Ohio set forth in their Constitution, in order to decide the question presented: Is H.B. 694 the law of Ohio?"
Judge Bender agreed with the Union Plaintiffs and declared the law unconstitutional. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss.
The bottom line is that the law itself is not being challenged for constitutionality but the process used to enact it. The law is still in effect until this issue of procedural process is resolved.
We have links to a summary of the process, the court's decision and AG's motion to dismiss - TPSINFO.COM - Ohio's Pay to Play laws
We also have the finance reports for school board candidates in the last election and holdovers Steel, Fisher and Torres, as well as, the TFT.
Reminds of the other systems we despise when it is about the party and not the people or serving the people.
Makes ya wonder -
Would this have gotten more press if it had been that 'other' party that they hate so much?
Here is a link to the stories in the Toledo Free Press
Officials may face sanctions over donations
Loophole could allow ‘legal money laundering
The Coalition has posted information including all the school board candidate as well as TFT campaign finance reports for 2007. We also posted the finance reports for the 3 candidates elected in 2005.
Of course, we have some observations on this subject.
Link to TPSINFO.COM
Go to TPSInfo and click on the Contact Us button, and you're 404d.
Jack - thanks. I was unaware of the problem. It occurred when changes were made to the menu. It is now corrected..
I imagine that some of the elected officials may not collude in the smaller amounts, but the Steel one and the Fedor one are very suspicious. Is this why Fedor was kicked out of her position in such an abrupt manner? Maybe there is something more here. If there is a $2,000 limit, why did Steel get $2300? TFT not reporting the 1k contribution, that is also troubling.
Actually these sound very provable. If they go through the campaign finance records and see if this is a new trend or not. If it is a new trend then, we have a problem here.
Also, what Steel, Ford and Sobecki must accept that when they accept so much money from internal interests, we can justifiably question them on it and their motivations. This is the baggage you accept when you sign and deposit the check. You cannot run away from it and you can plan on it staying with you until you return the money.
Regardless, this sums it up in the Publisher's statement:
Nothing illegal? Maybe not.
But nothing to be proud of, either.
will become evident if the union supported candidates make decisions reflecting the financial interests of the union at the expense of the children and educational programs offered by the administration.