* More background is here if you need it. Remember this?
Johnson’s campaign folks said they’d actually raised $200K during the quarter, but that it wasn’t reported.
* Turns out, they were apparently allowing the campaign checks to pile up before they deposited them, which they finally got around to doing. Tribune…
A new campaign finance report filed by Mayor Brandon Johnson includes over $200,000 his campaign had discussed but not officially reported. […]
State law requires politicians to report contributions greater than $1,000 within five business days of depositing the contributions. While Johnson may have been given checks for the large contributions months earlier, he appears to have followed campaign finance law by reporting the money shortly after depositing it, Illinois State Board of Elections spokesperson Matt Dietrich said.
Politicians often hold on to uncashed checks until elections get closer, he added. But for regulators, what matters is the deposit day.
“It’s not the day they had this big fundraiser, it’s the day they took all the money they raised at that fundraiser and put it into their bank account,” Dietrich said. “By our system, this has been done by the rules.”
It’s unclear whether any of those checks were received but not cashed during the Democratic National Convention last year, because the mayor’s third quarter report only disclosed about $3500 in receipts.
* Meanwhile, from the Sun-Times…
Mayor Brandon Johnson’s campaign fund has returned most of a $50,000 contribution it accepted a year and a half ago from a political action committee led by a City Hall lobbyist whose law firm has a city contract to collect outstanding utility bills.
Chicago ethics rules bar campaign contributions to a mayor by city lobbyists and city contractors. The Friends of Brandon Johnson campaign fund appears to have repeatedly violated those restrictions since Johnson took office in May 2023, prompting tens of thousands of dollars in refunds, the Chicago Sun-Times has reported.
The latest give-back appears to have been prompted by City Hall Inspector General Deborah Witzburg finding that the $50,000 given by the Chicago Latino Public Affairs Committee in June 2023 “exceeded the contribution limits set forth in” Chicago’s city code.
…Adding… It’s always a self-inflicted drip, drip, drip with this administration…
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 11:54 am:
Sure, Jan.
- City Zen - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 11:59 am:
“It’s not the day they had this big fundraiser, it’s the day they took all the money they raised at that fundraiser and put it into their bank account,”
Holding onto over $200,000 in checks for months doesn’t instill confidence in the mayor’s financial acumen.
Not sure if election cycles come into play for Chicago’s mayor, but I’d think you’d want to get any prior year contributions deposited before January 1, especially if they hadn’t previously contributed.
- OneOpinion - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 12:01 pm:
Holding checks to vet everything (including confirming compliance with donation limits or contributor prohibitions) is good practice and makes sense — though the Johnson campaign committee compliance record suggests they don’t vet well or at all. Skepticism is always warranted with this team.
- Steve - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 12:08 pm:
I wonder if this is Common Core, new style math ,at work?
- SusanDelgado - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 12:42 pm:
Seems like a nothing burger.
- lake county democrat - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 12:44 pm:
I know I love it when I send someone a big check and it remains undeposited for months.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 12:49 pm:
Witzburg can’t investigate checks they don’t cash, lol. I don’t see any issues with this practice. No flags here.
- @misterjayem - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 12:51 pm:
Sometimes you just hang the checks on the fridge and forget to take them in to deposit…
We’ve all been there, rite?
– MrJM
- Unionman - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 12:55 pm:
Maybe its time to enact “a cash within x number of days” law
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 1:07 pm:
===Maybe its time to enact “a cash within x number of days” law ===
I dunno. Not everybody with a campaign account has a large staff like the mayor does.
PO boxes are often checked irregularly.
It’s not a bad law just because of one person’s weirdness. But, yeah, this is a bit much.
- ChicagoBars - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 1:14 pm:
Does ISBE see the deposit slips?
I’m cynical but this feels ripe for those good old blowing the caps self funding notices where somebody says they loaned themselves one dollar more than needed to blow caps. Does that money ever move accounts or is it just somebody writing their campaign fund a IOU and filing the form?
- allknowingmasterofraccoondom - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 1:15 pm:
Seems like a nothing burger other than perhaps really bad admin work. Which is a kinda-burger.
- TheInvisibleMan - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 2:10 pm:
“We’ve all been there, rite?”
Embarrassingly, yes.
To this day I have a check from the state for one dollar stuck on my fridge, due to a rounding error on my part at tax time, signed by state treasurer Judy Baar-Topinka.
She was last in that office 18 years ago.
- thisjustinagain - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 2:12 pm:
One would think a political campaign would regularly check a P.O. Box and deposit checks promptly, if for no other reason to have the cash to spend. But BJ continues to show the sheer amateur-hour mismanagement he, his staff, and his campaign are known for. The law should be amended to require reporting within 10 days of RECEIVING the payment, even if not deposited.
- Alton Sinkhole - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 2:18 pm:
How progressive to cash that check from the Realtors lol
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 2:22 pm:
I believe they meant National Association of Promotional Retailers, but that only gets you to this truly ChatGPT written website. https://thenapr.org/.
- taco - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 3:16 pm:
Federal level the date is posted based on when an ‘agent’ of the campaign is in possession of the check. Candidate, staff, etc. so like the date of checks from an event most likely would be the day of the event.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 3:18 pm:
===campaign is in possession of the check … the date of checks from an event most likely would be the day of the event===
Lots of those checks are mailed in and lots of campaign entity mail isn’t processed quickly. It’s just not that simple.
- Walker - Friday, Jan 24, 25 @ 4:22 pm:
What Rich said. I once had a beef over a large campaign donation check mailed from Chicago which took over six weeks to hit my mail box in a Chicago suburb. USPS not always good around here. One of the reasons we switched to reporting based on when funds are actually deposited. When challenged, bank statements are reviewed.