I knew Mark Stodghill was a fair minded reporter. Here’s the nub of his story today:
Harry Welty of Let Duluth Vote blamed himself for not reading the law carefully enough. He understood the law to require reports only for the promotion of an existing ballot question, not for trying to get a ballot question on the ballot through petitions.
By golly, we may be guilty of a misdemeanor,” he said.
“If you try to get a referendum on a ballot then you’ve got to make reports. That’s a two-way street – if you’re trying to get one on and trying to prevent one from getting on,” Welty said in reference to those opposed to a referendum.
This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. MFD has never revealed their finances either. They are quick to claim that they don’t have to but that’s silly. Their whole reason to exist is to be a cheerleader for the School Board and to keep the Red Plan off the ballot (where it would lose) while discouraging a referendum on any alternative to the Red Plan by criticizing Let Duluth Vote.
They make a fetish of the spending side of the campaign finance law while missing its intent to reveal the pecuniary interests of donors trying to enrich themselves at the public’s expense.
Contractors, architects, and trade unions who have contributed to Move Forward Duluth should be revealed. Corporate donations may be illegal.
We’d love to know who paid for all of those full page MFD ads in the Trib.
Let Duluth Vote donors have no such conflict of interest. If you subtract me the average donation to Let Duluth Vote is about $25.
Move Forward Duluth risks exposing their own contributors by pursuing this, By golly.
