READ IT HERE FIRST
According to sources, Aldermanic President Jim Shrewsbury’s campaign finance report, which has been turned in but is not available online yet, shows he raised $90,000 between Oct. 1, 2006 and Jan. 20. The report shows Shrewsbury spending $42,000, with $238,824 left in the bank.
Still awaiting numbers from Shrewsbury’s challenger, Lewis Reed…
UPDATE: Shrewsbury’s report is now available online. It shows he raised $84,650, plus $2,220 in in-kind donations and $5,974.79 in payments from Citizens for Voter Rights for a loan he gave them in 2004.
As reported earlier, he has $238,824 cash on hand.
Loading ...
January 29th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
just curious; why arent the reports available; had to be received at board of elections by the 24th?
January 30th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Reed’s still isn’t online - does that mean he hasn’t filed yet?
January 30th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Hypocrit…what is Reed hiding?
January 30th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
talking about filing late, looking at the date stamp on the papers shrewsbury filed he was late filing by 5 days.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
It has to be postmarked by a certain date. Jefferson City scans them once they receive them in the mail, so his report probably wasn’t late. At least he filed at all - Come on Reed, what are you afraid of? Show us the money.
January 31st, 2007 at 8:19 am
well then maybe the same is true for reed’s papers.
January 31st, 2007 at 8:27 am
All of these posts look to be from the campaign of Jim Shrewsbury. Anonymous posting is the weakest form of attack. Either be a man, step-up and state your opinions or charges with your name or moniker attached, or please don’t comment. Because it is quite transparent from where these attacks come.
January 31st, 2007 at 9:06 am
Right. Because “watchdog” really identifies you.
January 31st, 2007 at 9:59 am
how do you know its Jim Shrewsbury or his people posting on here?
January 31st, 2007 at 10:35 am
Let me be very clear–I’m not making an accusation. When I hear one thing, I dismiss it. I hear two, I dismiss it. But when several well-respected members and former members of the Board of Aldermen, each of their own accord, express concern over the operations of the office of the President of the Board of Aldermen, it speaks volumes about what is exactly going on in that office. What exactly is going on behind those closed doors–those LOCKED closed doors? What is that staff being paid nearly $300,000 of the tax-payers’ money doing? Is it the peoples’ business being conducted in that office, or it is campaign work?
January 31st, 2007 at 10:45 am
Watchdog, you ARE making an accusation. An unfounded one at that. Let’s refer back to your “Anonymous posting is the weakest form of attack” argument. Who are you? Who are these well-respected current and former members of the Board that are expressing their concern? Where are they expressing their concern and to who? Exactly. Nowhere.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Reed posted his report and raised more than two times the donations as Shrewsbury. A day late, but not a dollar short.
January 31st, 2007 at 6:49 pm
More like $87,000 dollars short! Reed’s loaned himself money.
January 31st, 2007 at 7:54 pm
Here’s the word going around town tonight on Reed’s finances:
Total raised
$208,815
Spent
$113,626
On hand
$92,978
Loans to himself
$88,000 !!
January 31st, 2007 at 9:55 pm
If Reed only has $92,000 in the bank, turn the lights out, stick a fork in it, game over!