Previously I published the Greensboro City Council property disclosures. Problem was, there were 2 properties that had not been disclosed according to my understanding of the law. You see, the way I understand it, council members have 30 days from the date of purchase to disclose but Councilman Zack Matheny bought his New Irving Park home on February 29, 2012 and Councilwoman Nancy Hoffman bought her Downtown Greensboro property in early July of 2012. And both filed disclosure forms on November 1, 2012. (The link is to the disclosure form.)
Which leads me to ask the following:
1. What is the penalty for late disclosure?
2. Are councilmembers allowed to vote when not in compliance with disclosure rules?
3. If councilmembers are not allowed to vote when not in compliance with filing rules does that void their previous votes?
4. Would the August 2012 vote to fund $200,500 to the Greensboro Performing Arts Center be voided if Matheny's and Hoffman's votes are voided?
5. Will the Greensboro City Council have to go back and look at every single vote they have cast since late March of 2012, possibly tossing out every decision they have made?
6. Will entities like Downtown Greensboro Incorporated, Action Greensboro, the Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro and others be forced to return funds granted to them by the Greensboro City Council?
I've already sent the questions to the City of Greensboro and will be asking them again in front of the TV cameras on Tuesday night at the regular meeting of the Greensboro City Council.
Update: The following was sent to me by Greensboro City Attorney Mujeeb Shah-Khan in response to my questions: I have marked his answers in bold text.
"Here are Mr. Jones’ questions and my answers:
1. What is the penalty for late disclosure? There is no penalty.
2. Are Councilmembers allowed to vote when not in compliance with disclosure rules? I will not offer an opinion as to whether any Councilmember was in violation of the disclosure policy. But to answer your hypothetical, Councilmembers can continue to vote in that case.
3. If Councilmembers are not allowed to vote when not in compliance with filing rules does that void their previous votes? There is no restriction on voting, so a previous vote is valid.
4. Would the August 2012 vote to fund $200,500 to the Greensboro Performing Arts Center be voided if Matheny's and Hoffman's votes are voided? Their votes are valid, and would not be void.
5. Will the Greensboro City Council have to go back and look at every single vote they have cast since late March of 2012, possibly tossing out every decision they have made? No.
6. Will entities like Downtown Greensboro Incorporated, Action Greensboro, the Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro and others be forced to return funds granted to them by the Greensboro City Council? No."
Laws without consequences for breaking them? How is it that the very people who "lead" us are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us? When you or I are caught breaking a law we are fined or jailed but when Greensboro's elite City Council members-- those elected to make and uphold the laws we live by-- are found to be breaking the law they are given a free pass, no consequences, no means to keep them in line.
I'm attempting to contact the North Carolina School of Government and other state agencies to verify if what Greensboro City Attorney Mujeeb Shah-Khan has written is in-fact the truth or a lie. As an officer of the court he can be held liable for his answers if they are wrong. An answer could be weeks or months coming if it comes at all. If anyone reading this has contacts at the state level who could push this through before Tuesday night's city council meeting it would be greatly appreciated.
And if it turns out there really are no penalties for politicians who break the law? If it turns out that Greensboro City Attorney Mujeeb Shah-Khan is telling the truth? Then Greensboro is left with but 2 choices: give up all hope or revolution. You make the call.
