[
Some readers may have received a mailing or seen a flyer attributed to the Mike Kennedy campaign. The document, which looked like it had been designed for the Internal Revenue Service, made allegations about local businessman Vinny Zito (shown in the photo with candidate Jim Brannon). OpenCdA.com contacted Mr. Zito and obtained the document he prepared in response to the flyer’s allegations. Here is Mr. Zito’s response to the allegations in the flyer. The contents of the document attributed to the Kennedy Campaign are in bold blue type. Mr. Zito’s responses are in black type. [
[
[
Hi, my name is Vinny Zito and I am the lowest monetary donor on the Jim Brannon Campaign.
“FACT: Jim Brannon is running for City Council against incumbent Mike Kennedy.”
TRUE! Unfortunately, this is where the misleading starts.
“FACT: Sherman Ave. building owner Vinny Zito personally lobbied the City Council to allow unrestricted heights for his project on Sherman Ave, which would directly affect neighbors in the East Mullan Historical District.”
Now for the TRUE FACTS.
Well, the first sentence “Sherman Ave.” ???? ok! Who can argue with that? Don’t know where he was going with this one but…
“…personally lobbied the City Councl to allow unrestricted heights for his project on Sherman Ave…”
The only meeting I have ever had with a City Council member about the building project was with Mike Kennedy. This meeting’s purpose was to collect information on what it was going to take to get this project off the ground. After this meeting, and I found out what it was going to cost, I decided that I would no longer pursue it. That was just about a year ago. Remember that meeting Mike? I do!
“…unrestricted heights for his project…”
Okay, this is a straight lie. Mike, as I told you at our meeting, I am and have always been for restricting height limits on a project. Why would you put that in your propaganda letter?
“FACT: Vinny Zito is city council candidate Jim Brannon’s largest campaign donor.”
I let a friend I have known for years use a building that I lease. How many of you wouldn’t help out a friend? Incidentally, I have not made one monetary campaign contribution to Jim. At least this fact isn’t as convoluted as the last one, but I am an optimist.
FACT: Mike Kennedy will say anything to get elected including misleading YOU!!
“…building owner Vinny Zito…”
I don’t own the building; I hold the master lease on Jim’s campaign headquarters on Sherman Ave. Don’t believe me? Go down to the tax assessor’s office and find out who owns 2004 Sherman. Check your facts!
By the way, Kennedy’s flyer referred to “Tubbs Hill.” Where did that come from? I have nothing to do with Tubbs Hill. I hope it never gets developed, because I, like thousands of people in CdA, enjoy using it.
My question is, do we want a City Councilman that is reactionary, loses his head and puts out a misleading flyer as an act of desperation?? I wouldn’t! How can we trust him if he is willing to do anything, including misleading you and me, the people who vote. Makes me wonder what else he said that is misleading.
Thanks, Bill, for bringing us the other side of the story. Doesn’t every citizen have the right to donate to a campaign without fear of public attack from a city councilman?
The intimidation tactics from city hall are going into high gear. We’ve got to sweep things clean on Tuesday!
Comment by mary — October 30, 2009 @ 10:44 pm
Actually for a sitting Councilmen to compile, publish and distribute a document containing easily proven falsehoods and with the intent to malign the character of a citizen, could well be considered libelous. This was a shallow, poorly thought out and anger driven reaction to a flyer that Brannon did not author or distribute. There could be no better proof of Mike’s inability to think wisely under stress.
I also think that Mr. Zito should consult with legal counsel and consider his options. He is a local businessman and Kennedy has publicly misrepresented his character. Mr. Zito stands to suffer some severe consequences from Mike’s lies. I would be very upset. A public apology is in order at the very least.
Comment by Wallypog — October 31, 2009 @ 6:04 am
Mary and Wallypog,
Note that my post indicated the flyer was attributed to the Mike Kennedy campaign.
State law (Idaho Code 67-6614A), requires that on campaign literature “…the person responsible for such communication shall be clearly indicated on such communication.”
The flyer attacking Mr. Zito and others only reads “Paid for by Kennedy for City Council” followed by his campaign website’s URL. No specific person responsible for it has been indicated. In contrast, his website contains this statement: “Paid for by the Committee to Elect Mike Kennedy, LaDonna Beaumont, Treasurer.”
Comment by Bill — October 31, 2009 @ 7:39 am
Like the Silly Council Open Meeting Law violation, it really isn’t a violation, ask Mr. Gridley. Laws like that are meant to create orderly government and need to be construed in favor of the incumbent, just ask Mr. Kennedy. Or for that matter the impotent members of the barely working press at the Spokane paper. I mean really, if noisy foreigner sounding people like a Vinnie Zito can be involved in local politics, what horrors might happen? Jim Brannon could end up with access to that secret stuff that Sill Council denies being involved in and then what would happen?
TEOTWAWKI!
No more Inside Connections, no more jobs for people we like, no more land deals that rescue friends of the LCDC. Armageddon!
No Bill, be reasonable, understand that older, wiser (and heavier) heads really know what is best, they have a vision and your role needs to change. Learn to clap. Or else!
Comment by Pariah — October 31, 2009 @ 10:35 am
Maybe Brannon should run around town like a frenzied idiot and accost Mr. Kennedy about this scurrilous misrepresentation of facts? I hear it is all the rage this election season.
Comment by Wallypog — October 31, 2009 @ 11:13 am
Speaking about “misrepresentation of facts”, City Attorney Mike Gridley in his letter rejecting my complaint filed with the City on Thursday about violations of the Open Meeting law said, “I.C. 67-2342 defines a ‘meeting’ as the convening of a governing body of a public agency to make a decision or to deliberate towards a decision.” What the law says is different. At the end of the sentence following the word,”decision”, add, “on any matter.” Strange that he would eliminate three operative words that make a difference. Any matter that requires an agreement by the council is subject to the provisions of the Open Meeting Law. Stay tuned.
Comment by Gary Ingram — October 31, 2009 @ 12:41 pm
Is Mike Gridley governed by the Canons of Ethics?
A lawyer’s conduct should conform to the requirements of the law, both in professional service to clients and in the lawyer’s business and personal affairs. A lawyer should use the law’s procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials.
Comment by Pariah — October 31, 2009 @ 1:51 pm
Mikey, on TV, on the attack!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25tBFjtTMZQ
Comment by Pariah — October 31, 2009 @ 3:15 pm
Pariah, apparently, we posted the same video at almost the same exact time.You musta stole that link off my letter to the editor, that someone had posted. 😉
Comment by kageman — October 31, 2009 @ 3:54 pm
Pariah,
In comment #7 you asked if City Attorney Mike Gridley is governed by the Canons of Ethics. The material you cited, “A lawyer’s conduct should…” came from the preamble to the Idaho Rules of Professional Conduct. These are the rules that Idaho attorneys are to comply with to the best of their ability. Like many supposedly hard-and-fast rules, the IRPC is riddled with the permissive “should” rather than the compulsory “shall.” Ultimately, the IRPC’s effectiveness as a regulatory document comes down to the personal qualities and traits of the people whose conduct it hopes to regulate. If Idaho’s attorneys choose to overlook misconduct by attorneys admitted to the Idaho State Bar, then the rules fail to have any credibility. Worse, they undermine the trust and confidence citizens have in those attorneys. The “Commentary” under the Rule 8.x sections in the link are helpful.
Citizens who believe they have evidence showing any Idaho attorney has committed misconduct can seek disciplinary action imposed by the Idaho State Bar.
Comment by Bill — November 1, 2009 @ 6:46 am