Monday, June 20, 2011

Would you like some gravy with that?

Here in the patch, we've enjoyed some pretty good home cooking through the years, but it seems nothing like the kid-gloves treatment the Herald-Standard continues to bestow on favorite sons Vince Vicites and Vince Zapotosky.

Case in point: Monday's story, "Countywide candidates file campaign finance reports," which had some reporting gaps big enough to drive a runaway truck on Summit Mountain through.

Everyone in politics knows that the two biggest and most interesting campaign expense reports are the one filed two weeks before the election, and the one filed 30 days after Election Day. The "second Friday pre," as it is commonly known, gives a detailed glimpse of how much money each candidate has raised, from whom, and how it has been spent.

But because it is filed on the second Friday BEFORE the election, it doesn't provide a complete picture. Any contributions received in the home stretch, as well as any expenditures (including advertising and cash paid to poll workers), won't show up until the "30-day post" election report is filed with the Fayette County Election Bureau.

These filings are not optional; they are required by law. And if you miss a filing deadline, you have to pay a small daily fine until that is done.

In Monday's story, readers found out that Al Ambrosini, who finished first in the Democratic primary for county commissioner, "loaned himself $20,000" and "paid poll workers amounts ranging from $25 to $75 each" and "spent a total of $25,681 in the reporting period, which included May 3 through June 6. The expenses included advertising costs for WLSW radio for $2,000; Mail Specialty Inc. of Greensburg for mail services in the amount of $3,050; and Herald-Standard.com ads for $1,927."

That's a pretty detailed snapshot on Ambrosini, who was not endorsed by the Herald-Standard.

The newspaper also reported that "Republican incumbent Commissioner Angela M. Zimmerlink of Allison, who was the top vote-getter for her party, listed expenditures of $2,134. Zimmerlink does not accept campaign contributions. She spent money on a radio advertisement and a $2,054 mailer." Another fairly detailed analysis, though of a much lesser amount, on a candidate who did not get an endorsement.

Readers found out that "Dave Lohr of South Connellsville, who won the second Republican party nomination, spent $1,557 during the reporting period and ended with unpaid debts and obligations of $1,090, which he owes to himself," and that he got a $250 contribution from Mark Rowan, a Connellsville attorney
.
The newspaper also told us that "Marilyn Cellurale of Lemont Furnace, who finished third on the Republican ticket and did not win a nomination for county commissioner, spent $2,999 during the reporting period, and received $9,500 in contributions," and that her contributions included $7,500 from Terry“Tuffy” Shallenberger of Connellsville, chairman of the Fayette County Airport Authority.

But when it comes to the campaign's two biggest spenders, Monday's story left out some details and more than a few unanswered questions.

Vicites, readers found out, "spent $24,905 during the reporting period. He also listed unpaid debts and obligations of $14,728, which he owes to himself." But when it comes to ANY details, such as how much he paid poll workers (see Ambrosini) or spent on advertising (see Ambrosini and Zimmerink, above), nothing was mentioned.

Even worse, from a reporting angle -- or at least from a "fair and balanced" reporting angle -- is this paragraph from that story: Vicites, who is finishing his fourth term in office, listed contributions of $12,224, but a detailed listing was not available.

If a detailed listing was not available, shouldn't the newspaper tell its readers why? As we noted earlier, this filing is required by law and it was due Friday. Was the listing of which sources contributed more than $12,000 to Vicites in the weeks leading up to the election not included in his expense report? Did the election bureau refuse to give it out? Did the reporter lose those particular pages on the way to the office and say, "Oh, what the heck!"?

If the Herald-Standard can inform us that of Cellurale's $9,500 in contributions, $7,500 from Terry “Tuffy” Shallenberger of Connellsville, chairman of the Fayette County Airport Authority, shouldn't they be obligated to tell us where Vicites got $12,000? Or at least tell us why they couldn't find that out? We are pretty sure they have his phone number.

If the newspaper can tell us that Ambrosini paid his poll workers between $25 and $75 each, why can't they give us some idea of what Vicites paid his? And if Vicites paid no poll workers at all -- which is highly unlikely -- why couldn't the newspaper simply report that fact?

Of Zapotosky, the newspaper reported that he "did not file a report with his committee as of Friday afternoon and had only filed a report in which he paid his campaign $300." So did he miss the filing deadline? Will he have to pay the daily fine for doing so? If and when his campaign committee files its 30-day post-election report, will the Herald-Standard tell us how much he raked in, from whom, and how he spent it?

Back on May 15, in the story "Fayette County commissioner candidates file expense reports," the newspaper reported this: “The Committee to Elect Vincent Zapotosky” brought more than $25,000 forward from his last report and received $25,300 in contributions. He had $50,535 available and spent $31,181, leaving a balance of $19,353. He also has unpaid debts and obligations of $4,800." You can read it for yourself here: http://www.heraldstandard.com/news/local_news/fayette-county-commissioner-candidates-file-expense-reports/article_01427f18-3baa-5b15-8a44-ce6e9c242d63.html

So Zapotosky's campaign committee carried forward more than $19,000, and we have no public accounting of how -- or if -- it was spent. Or of how much in contributions "The Committee to Elect Vincent Zapotsky" raked in in the two weeks leading up to the election.

But, thank God, the Herald-Standard had the moxie to let us know that Dave Lohr got a $250 contribution from attorney Mark Rowan, that Zimmerlink spent a whopping $2,130 and that the going rate for an Ambrosini poll worker was between $25 and $75.

We will let you judge whether this was fair and equal treatment of all six candidates.

1 comment:

  1. I wonder how much of this is the fault of the reporters and how much is the editors. It's possible that the reporters have and try to include the information and editing takes it out, or the reporters are told by editors what to include. It's hard to tell, since even in smaller scale articles, i.e. ones not involving politics, I've noticed reporters leaving very easy-to-fill gaps. So in that case, they're not doing their jobs and editing isn't helping. Either way, it's not good and shouldn't be done. I've heard from previous H-S reporters that articles are very political, which I'm sure isn't a shock to you. Good to see someone who knows a lot more than I do about some of these issues is tackling and analyzing them.

    ReplyDelete