Greg Stanton is a candidate for the Phoenix mayor position. He's also the lone "moderate" in the race. As I've written previously, Phoenix city elections are nominally non-partisan; but this year, Republicans and the Tea Party are hell bent on injecting partisan, conservative messaging into the race.
The theme of "union-corruption" of City Hall is so prevalent, it has been used by every single conservative candidate. The full background of this can be seen here (partially), here(azCentral), and in the above referenced diary.
The only candidate not drinking the TEA is Greg Stanton. And after Greg's campaign account got robbed of over $70,000, and with two weeks until the Phoenix mayoral election, an article arises that questions whether or not Greg's campaign is breaking campaign finance laws for accepting the money that was stolen back.
The title of the article: "Phoenix mayoral candidate Greg Stanton's funds in question
Campaign-contribution concerns being raised"
So, more FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) politics being played by the Tea Party and AZ GOP. Whether or not Ms. Bui is a willing participant is irrelevant- The Arizona Republic (of which azcentral.com is the online venue) is known for a conservative bias (though derided by the Tea Party true believers as a "liberal rag"), and such FUD articles seem to be the modus operandi when a close election rolls around here in the valley.
Who is raising these questions? Of course Ms. Bui does not say. That would get in the way of the narrative of another corrupt union-owned Democrat occupying City Hall.
And the concern from the lawyers is noted:
But the legality of how the money was repaid has raised legal concerns. State law limits campaign contributions from an individual to $430, and some could argue that the repayment could be considered a single contribution exceeding donation caps, said Mike Liburdi, an attorney at Snell and Wilmer who worked for the Federal Election Commission in 2008.
"The reason why the law prohibits someone from just writing a $70,000 check to a campaign is to prevent that corruptive influence," Liburdi said. "I would not advise a client to spend any money received in excess of what the law allows."
...
Liburdi questioned the involvement of a third party, Billy Shields and his wife, in the matter.
"The candidate's remedy is to go after the person who stole the money," Liburdi said. "You can't disregard the limitations on campaign contributions in order to right some wrong committed by another person."
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/...
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/...
Joe Kanefield, former Arizona elections director and an attorney at Ballard Spahr, said it is up to the City Clerk and City Attorney to determine whether everything was properly handled, although the federal cases Stanton's campaign cites are similar to the Shields case.
In February, Phoenix's City Clerk Department and Law Department declined to comment over how Stanton's campaign handled the finance filings and whether the money can be transferred to his mayoral campaign. The city attorney said it would require a formal legal complaint to review any concerns.
Kanefield declined to offer an opinion on whether Mindy Shields could be considered a "pass-through" of money to Stanton.
"These are important, legitimate questions that have to be asked, and that's what the election officials are tasked to determine," Kanefield said.
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/...
So no formal complaint has been filed, and there are lawyers speculating and advising Greg Stanton to NOT spend any of the money in the crucial two weeks prior to the election. Money which could buy ads. Money that could print fliers. And money that could keep the Tea Party/ GOP out of Phoenix City Hall.