Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 21 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Fortenbery must identify donors
Published Wednesday, June 18, 2008
NATCHEZ — Ward 5 alderman-elect Mark Fortenbery improperly filled out his campaign finance reports during the election and must now correct the problem.
Fortenbery listed multiple anonymous donations to his campaign.
Mississippi state statute requires that any contribution over $200 made to a political candidate be fully reported.
Out of the 15 contributions Fortenbery received from Jan. 1 through May 31, 13 were listed as anonymous.
Of those 13 contributions, 10 were $200 or more.
Fortenbery said he did not realize he needed to list the names of the donors and wanted to maintain a level of privacy for his donors’ sake.
“I didn’t think it was the public’s interest,” he said. “I thought that was my business.”
He said he considered monetary donations to his campaign a private matter.
City Clerk Donnie Holloway sat down with Fortenbery on Tuesday and requested he fill out the report again.
As of Tuesday afternoon, Fortenbery said he was almost finished with the task.
“I’m straightening it out and turning it back in,” he said.
Holloway said he can turn in the report in the form of the termination report, which all candidates are required to turn in.
Holloway said no punitive action will be taken against Fortenbery, as this is only a minor discrepancy.
“This is just small scale stuff,” Holloway said. “You’ve got to take it serious and all but this is Mark’s first time doing this.”
Fortenbery said overall he just didn’t understand the procedure.
“I was really unaware of that,” he said. “I’ll make it right with the law, and honestly I didn’t know.”
Comments
Posted by Mucasplug (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 6:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why is this big news??
Posted by rls39120 (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 7:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I completely agree...on a scale of importance, this does not even rate. This is his first time to be in office. I am sure there are a lot of processes he is going to have to learn.
Posted by reader (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I really like Mark, always have, but those forms are very clear. "I didn't think it was the public's interest" The public needs and deserves to know where all of a candidates significant contributions come from, that's why you fill those reports out in the first place.
Posted by justine (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The other candidates filed openly, or they at least gave the appearance of such. But Fortenberry said he didn't think it was the public's business? (“I didn’t think it was the public’s interest,” he said. “I thought that was my business.”
He said he considered monetary donations to his campaign a private matter.)
I hope Fortenberry changes his attitude and conducts his "city business" legally and openly. Just because he's elected doesn't mean it's his business only and not ours.
Posted by destiny (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Once voted into office you can forget about 'my business' because, from here on out until you leave office or you are voted out, it's "OUR BUSINESS". It took our votes to get you there and now you have become a PUBLIC SERVANT, not a private citizen. The citizens of Natchez have finally woke up to the fact that we have to hold elected officials feet to the fire to have a decent government and we're getting even more fierce about it. So Mark, all I can say is, we are not watching just you, but All EYES are on all elected city and county leaders now and you will have to come public with all questions and answers. Thank you Donnie and N. D. for bringing this to our attention. Good work. One little deception going unnoticed leads to larger ones.
Posted by mike8427 (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 10:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well said destiny. I don't think people think Mark had wrong intentions, but he choose to be a politican. He's gonna have to learn that alot of eyes are now on him. Thats just politics.
Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 10:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Donnie Holloway thank you for doing your job....
Posted by scarlettohara (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 10:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The guy made an honest mistake--he's new. Plus, it was pretty minor. He said he would correct it and submit the proper paperwork.
Come on. Give the guy a chance! He hasn't even had a chance to get his feet wet, yet the wolves come snipping at his heels already.
Some of you aren't happy unless you have something negative to chew on here each day. Jeez!!!
Posted by Greenfields (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 11:02 a.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by resson (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 12:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Donations = Influence
His comments don't exhibit the attitude you would like a public official to have.
Posted by acedog (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
somebody needs to teach him that when you run for a public office nothing is private or consider your bussiness, come on man who are you kidding!
Posted by hossfly (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The negative comments come from people who think he has an association with Natchez High. The positive comments come from those who think his association is with Trinity. Headlines:
"Local Politician with Natchez High Connections Deceives Public Over Campaign Contributions"
"Local Politician with Trintiy Connections Innocently Makes Disclosure Mistakes"
Posted by scarlettohara (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hoss,
Did I miss something?? Why do you bring school association into this? What does it possibly have to do with any part of the story???
Also, don't his children go to Cathedral?
Again, am I missing something here?
Posted by mike8427 (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yeah Hoss - Where did you pull that junk from? Are you reading the right article?
Posted by natchez500 (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 7:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
when charles wood ran for sheriff he only showed his contributions and i mean all of them as his personal cont. the nd was aware and circuit clerk . he did thid both times he ran for sheriff and after the elections both times, he was sued by creditors . if this man was black, no one would question this like woods is and look at west record, does anyone think we are so crazy that he only got money from out of towners and also put so much of his own money in the election. true real people donot use their money. you have to have supporters to run for office giving money and time. anyway fortenberry just do us a good job
Posted by natchez500 (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 7:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
shame on you republican city clerk you could have helped fortenberry when he turned this in, but you showed your face, you tried to make a good man lok like he did something wrong
Posted by supermom (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
AMEN SCARLETTOHARA!!!!
He made a mistake, he admitted it, and he's fixing it....
but, like you said, some people just need something to gripe about.
Posted by hossfly (anonymous) on June 18, 2008 at 9:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
To Mike and Scarlett: The reason I wrote that is because that any time Natchez High is in the news, the ND puts a negative spin on it (remember the power lifting debacle) but if the golden child Trinity does something it is all okay. I can elaborate if you like. It was sarcasm in general and not anything to do with Fortenbery.
Posted by scarlettohara (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hoss, I'm probably posting this too late, but just read your comments.
I still find it strange that you would post something of that nature to this story. It has nothing whatsoever
to do with anything---sarcasm or not.
You must have a very large chip on your shoulder when it comes to Trinity!
Contrary to what you may think, all the kids at Trinity do not come from well-to-do families. There are tons
of 'regular' folks that struggle to make ends meet, but want to provide their children with a quality education.
Posted by hossfly (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The point is that any and every thing negative that happens at NHS ends up in the paper and nothing negative is ever written about Trinity. So many of these comments say things like "inside job" about the stolen things from NHS but when Trinity had the vandalism no negative comments were made about Trinity. I don't have a chip. I have no association with either school. I am just commenting on the reality of the different attitudes toward the two schools. I was comparing the "stolen mowers" article to this story. You are right. There is no relationship between the two. I was just saying how the headlines would have read if he would have had an association with one school or the other.
Posted by justine (anonymous) on June 22, 2008 at 8:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Will the N. Dem. report the findings in the paper? Fortenberry's report needs to be published so his new constituents are informed.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)