Middletown Board of Education member and Democratic Township Committee candidate Pat Walsh's conflict of interest problems and improper financial reporting problems where subject to hearings by the School Ethics Commission in 2001.
The Ethics Commission did not rule on the allegations, but rather dismissed the complaint due to an improper certification by the complainant.
The commission found that the complaint, that Walsh was had a conflict when she voted against the Middletown Board of Education paying the legals fees of Thomas Stokes in his litigation against her, and that she did not properly account for "at least $25,000" in monies provided to her by Cathy Sullivan, "presented interesting issues" but that it could not rule on them because the complaint before them was not properly filed.
In other words, she got off on a technicality.
A copy of the commissions findings can be downloaded here.
Walsh needs to address these issues, beyond her cursory "they're lies!" Why are they lies Pat?
May the Force Be With Us
23 hours ago
Posts
14 comments:
Wayne Bryant, Joe Coniglio, et al. got off on ethics commission technicalities too. . . . before they were indicted.
There are many others that have gotten off of Ethics Commission charges that have had to face the music because of scenarios THAT ALMOST PARALLEL HERS. Can anyone say Kangaroo Court?
Art - criminal charges are still an possible avenue, right?
dont pay your taxes - go to jail
dont reveal earnings/gifts/loans - go to jail
an ethics commission amounts to a hill of beans. it is an internal court that could not rule on the misconduct of Walsh because Stokes 'paid' someone to file the claim for him
lets here the answers to some of those questions Peppermint Patty
Art - criminal charges are still an possible avenue, right?
I don't know. I am not an expert on such matters.
Republican Senator Indicted for Allegedly Lying on Financial Disclosure Forms
See: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5472829
The 28-page indictment charged that the Alaska Republican "knowingly and intentionally sought to conceal and cover up his receipt of things of value by filing Financial Disclosure Forms that contained false statements and omissions" regarding $250,000 in gifts of value.
I don't think its important that she slipped through a loophole I think its important that she be held accountable
Keep in mind, this is just what we know of. How many more instances of gifts, illegal uses of campaign funds for personal use and possible deals with school vendors are out there? A forensic audit of her finances by Chris Christie would probably uncover a mountain of wrongdoing. Anyone who can conduct herself so secretly at BOE meetings where over $140 million of our tax money is spent every year must have other violations lurking in the closet.
Whats really intresting about this whole thing is the amount of passionate partisan comments that Art's posts on a two bit municipal election elicit while his posts on presidential politics get virtually nothing. My experience has been that at the local level the whole party thing is irrelevant to how people govern but while their is sometimes not much difference between how Republicans and Democrats act in Washington at least there are overeaching themes of the role of government where they have substantial differences.
You would therfore think the national election would draw more partisan commentary.
Frankly, more is at stake in middletown that will actually impact people if the dems get elected. Take Hoboken, for example, it has almost exactly the same population as middletown, it is controlled by democrats, its budget is twcie what middletown's is and they still can't pay all their bills.
I don't know if you can call the biggest town in Monmouth County a "two bit" election.
I actually find the opposite to be true son of liberty. The problem in local elections is that not enough people pay attention, but come a Presidential election and everyone becomes an expert on the candidates and they flock to the polls on election day. NJ will vote Obama (like it or hate it), so it's really irrelevent to spend so much time and effort debating an election where your vote couldn't count less. However, when people have more power to change the political landscape of their local and county govenment, the record shows they stay home in droves and that is what really doesn't make any sense.
JM
yes, it is a lie. It wasn't $30,000 ...it was actually closer to $100,000 (get the testimony of her attorney at the school ethics committe and he said it was about "$90,000"
and Walsh was asked if she had paid any of it back. Under oath, she said, "No".
Sorry, your article has one slight error. Walsh didn't vote against paying Stokes' legal fees for litigation he had against her.
She voted not to pay Stokes' legal fees for the false criminal charges she filed against Stokes and hired her own personal prosecutor (didn't use the township prosecutor).
The (Democratic) Judge, in throwing out the criminal charges against Stokes, said, "Let me put it this way. Shakespeare wrote a play called "Much Ado About Nothing". Then he dismissed all charges.
The money Walsh took was to pay her legal fees to defend her against a lawsuit filed by Stokes against her for filing false criminal charges.
Walsh did try to have the Board of Education pay for her legal fees and was turned down.
She never informed any BOE member that she was taking a so-called "loan" (at no interest) from an individual who was also suing the school board.
Post a Comment