In an Independent News Cover Story from Sept. 4, 2008, Rick Outzen writes:
“The Morgan campaign strategy was simple. ‘We made no secret that I was going to stand in front of people and tell the truth about the administration of this sheriff. I knew if we could get the information in front of enough people we would win,’ says Morgan. ‘We needed to communicate effectively that McNesby’s record needs a second look.'”
When I read this, I have to admit, I laughed out loud. Morgan has never stood up in front of ANY administration and told the truth about anything. As we already substantiated, he lies on pathological basis. He claims any number of things including his own belief in term limits & not to elect him, should he go “stupid”, yet he then contradicts himself or flat out succumbs to arrogance and runs for a third term.
Sir David claims that McNesby’s record needs a second look, while his record shows that he gives ill-equipped officers guns to put 16 bulletholes in an unarmed suspect and his vehicle for reaching for a cigarette; he also infamously made newspapers for being ill-informed and arrogantly making broad, generalizing statements like “it’s witchcraft” or that Muslims are like Nazis. That is his record.
His fiduciary accountability is questionable in that he donated money that is not his in return for monies funneled into his campaign like Brownsville; this is researched and documented by CJ’s Street Report.
So while McNesby had questionable ethics, Sir David has far exceeded him in that race. His minion David Craig even eluded to the fact that Morgan stole the election over McNesby.
In the same article mentioned above, this is another excerpt that is curious:
‘”We went into the election day knowing that we were going to win by 10 points or more,’ David Craig interjects. The actual margin of victory was 13.4 percentage points, or 3,211 votes. In the 2004 Republican primary, McNesby beat Morgan by 34 points.”
How could anyone possibly know they were going to win going into election day? Or exactly what the spread would be?
McNesby may have done some unethical things but it appears Morgan’s first official criminal act was manipulating election results.
Sheriff Morgan Campaign: LETF Out, Donations In
Sheriff Morgan uses the Law Enforcement Trust Funds for many reasons. He apparently provides funds for deserving organizations, like the $50,000 he provided to Gulf Coast Kids House, which cares for abused children, to expand the facilities because they were operating at twice their operational capacity.
Or, sometimes he gives money to the haves so that they have more, like the AFCEA Blue Angels that received $20,000, on March 3, 2015, according to the Law Enforcement Trust Fund expenditures given to CJ’s Street Report’s public records request. Or, the $15,000 Sheriff Morgan gave to the National Flight Academy after he gave he speech there. The donation was made on March 25, 2014.
Or, he gives money to his ideological allies in the Christian Right in Pensacola.
Like the $10,500 he gave to the Assembly of God’s Teen Challenge, also known as the Pensacola Men’s Center, for “drug treatment” that is a cover for outright Christian proselytizing.
Like the $5,000 he gave to the Men’s Barn Meeting which functions as a networking hub linking Baptist churches in the local area to Southern Baptist Convention leaders in the Christian Right.
Like the $7,000 he gave to the Alabama-based Youth Reach Gulf Coast, despite the organization not having provided any services to any youth or young man from Escambia County, Florida.
When advised by Americans United for Separation of Church & State that these specific donations violated the U.S. and Florida constitutions, the response of the Sheriff’s Office was that they were not going to respond to the Americans United’s legal inquiry.
Or, he gives money to worthwhile causes and the person receiving the Law Enforcement Trust Funds then later makes a donation to Sheriff Morgan’s re-election campaign, as happened when Sheriff Morgan authorized a rapid donation of $1,000 for the non-existent Light the Night Foundation (in reality the Alabama-based Leukemia & Lymphoma Society with no business license in Florida) that was delivered to Pete Moore. Pete Moore and his wife later made two $500 donations to Sheriff Morgan’s campaign. Pete Moore gives to Republican sheriffs and candidates, so the $1,000 donated from the Sheriff’s Office is not a factor. But, it does not look good. While there is no quid-pro-quo here, it is amazing the Sheriff can write a donation check to a non-existent foundation.
And, now we have Sheriff Morgan’s re-election campaign using the property owned by the Filipino-American Association of Pensacola, Inc., a 501(c)3 organization for his fundraising event on September 26, 2015.
Not only is the Filipino-American Association a 501(c)3 organization that is prohibited from engaging in politics, but in 2014 it received $7,000 in two donations: $2,000 on May 28, 2014 (reference V10719) and $5,000 on August 26, 2014 (reference V11991). CJ’s Street Report has a public records request for all the documentation, plus any donations made to the Filipino-American Association since October 1, 2014.
Again, while there is no quid pro quid, we find the same pattern of Law Enforcement Trust Funds going to an organization that, in turn, provides a venue for a fundraising event tapping its own members for donations.
Thus, while there is no doubt that the Filipino-American Association does fine work in the community and has been recognized by the county and state officials for their good works–as evidenced by the plaques expressing support on one of the walls of the hall–the fact is the organization is prohibited from engaging in political activity.
“Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.”
Thus, a 501(3) organization is “absolutely prohibited” from “directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign.” There really isn’t much wiggle room to “absolutely prohibited” and “directly or indirectly.” How Sheriff Morgan convinced them Filipino-American Association to violate this IRS guidance is a mystery.
CJ’s Street Report attended the fundraising event for a very short time. Upon my third entrance, Deputy Chief Haines congratulated me for my “valiant attempt” to attend the fundraising event, but I was informed it was a “private function” and I was not welcome. However, before being graciously and humorously turned away, I did manage to take photographs of the event and keep my receipt.
|The sign outside the front door.|
|The inner door decorated with “Re-elect Sheriff Morgan.” Once inside the door, you gave your donation via check and received a receipt.|
|Stage and dais where Sheriff Morgan was to speak at the event.|
|Long view of the stage with more “Re-elect Sheriff Morgan” signs.|
Sheriff Morgan’s website invitation to the event begins, “Back by popular demand…Karaoke fundraiser on September 26th. Besides Karaoke, there will be dancing, socializing, and Filipino Food.”
Now, Karaoke night just happens to be one of the Filipino-American Association’s fundraisers, according to Form 990s filed with the Internal Revenue Service. In 2011, Karaoke brought in a net of $2,193.05. In 2012, the Filipino-American Association spent $3,100.95 on Karaoke equipment and tables, and brought in a net of $2,144.06. In 2013, Karaoke night brought in a net of $1,084.25.
Thus, when Sheriff Morgan’s invitation exclaimed, “Back by popular demand…Karaoke fundraiser,” he was clearly referencing an annual fundraising event put on by the Filipino-American Association that over the past three years had netted the organization $5,421.36 or an average of $1,807.12 per year. Except this year, checks were to be made payable to the “Re-elect Morgan Campaign.”
Why would Sheriff Morgan not do his due diligence and recognize that giving at least $7,000 to a non-profit corporation and then having them host via their own venue a campaign fundraiser would not raise questions, and, why would he not consider what effect, if any, that campaign fundraiser would have the Filipino-American Association’s tax-exempt status?
One possible answer is that Sir David Morgan simply does not believe that the U.S. Constitution, the Florida constitution, and Internal Revenue Service regulations apply in Pensacola.
Another possible answer is that the officers and board members of the Filipino-American Association (as reported on the 2011, 2012, and 2013 Form 990s) have personally donated to Sheriff Morgan $1,740. Thus, he may have deliberately targeted the Filipino-American Association’s board and officers for the fundraiser knowing that they personally support his candidacy and might not consider the possible ramifications.
One last observation, apparently, this hyphenated name, Filipino-American, does not upset Sheriff Morgan as the term “African-American” to him is dysfunctional and “divisive.”
NOTE: Ms. Jimmie Staley co-authored this report.