Monday, February 23, 2009

Did Carl Wimmer not report a Rick Koerber in kind contribution last November 1st?

If someone sends out a political advocacy email on October 31 from a private list (though I don’t believe Koerber’s claims of “hundreds” of subscribers in Wimmer’s district nor the overall size of his mailing list he’s claimed at other times) promising to buy lunch for any volunteer and their family who will walk the district handing out fliers on November 1, shouldn’t those meals be reported as at least an “in kind” contribution?

They weren't.

I linked to Representative Wimmer’s general election report submitted on Oct. 28, 2008 as well as the year-end report submitted on Jan. 12, 2009. The Koerber contribution should have been reported in the year-end report, but I included both to show that I didn’t just miss something by using the wrong report.

I guess if no one actually showed up that morning, then this would be a moot point, but I bet there were at least a few people there that got an unreported Iceberg lunch.


.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Have you reported this to the Lt. Gov. and the Attorney General???

S. Lomai (Davis Co) said...

After looking into it Utah Statute actually exempts the "contribution" in question. 20A-11-101(6)(a) and 20A-11-101(6)(b).

69(b) exempts the volunteer efforts done by Koerber's supporters. And Koerber's lunch to them clearly is not "compensation" since there was no direct relationship between the work and the reward. Lunches price and sizes varied, and so did the times volunteered, yet all were treated alike.

Maybe the law should be changed, but as it stands, nothing had to be reported.

Anonymous said...

"And Koerber's lunch to them clearly is not "compensation" since there was no direct relationship between the work and the reward."

Sorry, I just don't get that statement. The statute doesn't use the word "compensation", just "contribution." The volunteer time was not a contribution, but the free lunches sure were.