Glodis is the candidate that keeps on giving. While this is not as good as his promise to “Reign (over) Wasteful Political Spending”…or balking at paying taxes that everyone agrees his campaign has to pay…it’s still a gem for someone running for “Auditor”
Glodis’ latest campaign finance report is out (I was poking around to see what brilliant high-paid consultant was responsible for the Reign/Rein blooper) and found this…
Glodis itemized three spending items on his campaign finance report totaling nearly $10,000 as ILLEGIBLE under the “purpose” column.
So Glodis thinks its OK to itemize things as “ILLEGIBLE” when documenting spending…just the kind of quality we need to be looking for in the next Auditor.
Please share widely!
Under state law, candidates for auditor- as well as other statewide, county, and some city offices- are called depository candidates. As opposed to candidates for legislature, who file before primaries, general elections, and at year’s end, these candidates have to file monthly, and in election years, bi-monthly reports.
<
p>
<
p>From the OCPF website:
In other words, the banks draft and file the expenditure reports, not the candidates themselves.
<
p>
<
p>Under MGL Ch. 55, §19 depository candidates also have to use special checks, which have a box to check of the purpose of the expenditure, with a line to fill in its specific purpose. This is what the bank uses to fill out the periodic expenditure forms. The bank clerk was unable to read the handwriting of whomever filled out that nox on that particular check. In this case, Guy Glodis (or one of his campaign staffers) is merely guilty of poor penmanship.
<
p>
The Campaign also has responsibility for logging deposits and clarifying expenses on the OCPF database. What the depository bank reports is limited to what is checked on the boxes and written in by the campaign. The campaign can and, in my opinion, should enhance the information on line to make it more understandable for users of the OCPF system and OCPF themselves. Ultimately, the campaign should get a letter (or letters) from OCPF asking for additional information to be entered, but waiting for an OCPF audit to ask a candidate to enhance their descriptions seems poor form for an auditor candidate.
<
p>Guy continues to display a lack of attention to detail that is troubling coming from a candidate for Auditor. I can only hope that the voters are paying more attention on September 14th.
But can we have a little higher bar for a candidate for state auditor who can document purchases in a manner that people can track the purchases…
I noticed that report indicates that Glodis used some of his funds on a “wedding gift” for a friend. I’m no legal expert, but wouldn’t that violate MGL Ch. 55 Sec. 6, which prohibits the use of campaign funds for personal expenditures?
<
p>
Looking at his campaign OCPF expense reports for May through August yields some interesting expense entries:
<
p>5/14 – Heather Melandez – Graduation Gift – $150
<
p>7/1 – Elizabeth Junean – Gift Graduation – $50
<
p>8/2 – Leo Risforante – Reception Gradt Party – $2,000
<
p>8/27 – Mr & Mrs Mark Linde – Wedding Gift – $150
<
p>Now I am familiar with some politicians sending flowers to the wakes and funerals of long time supporters. I am not familiar with campaigns providing wedding and graduation gifts and even a graduation party out of campaign funds. They may or may not fall within the definition of campaign spending but for a man who is looking to rein (see Guy I could help with spelling) in spending it looks odd to have this amount of potentially personal spending running through hs campaign account. It would take an investigation by the OCPF to be sure so I am only pointing out that the expenses look odd and bear further scrutiny and response by the campaign.
I wonder if Leo Risforante = Leo’s Ristorante, Worcester, MA
<
p>Hate to say it, but oh well.
should have said “hate to defend him”