It is the end election season and things are really heating up. With ballots mailed out and due by Nov.3 all the momentum of an entire campaign is weighing heavy on the backs, minds and eyelids of all the candidates. Meanwhile, on the streets among citizens there is a peculiar energy in the air. One might catch fire from merely clicking a pen, dropping a ballot or saying those two very tired words: impact fees.

With the flurry of information out there it’s a difficult to pick the right candidate. Facts, rumors, lies all come at you like black-eyed-dogs in a nightmare-gauntlet of rabid misinformation. It’s not exactly the best time to be a journalist either. To report or not to report? The answer is always to just dig.

Indeed. The Ballard News Tribune recently observed one of these hellish dissemination-dilemmas after a document started circulating last week that falsely implicated Councilmen Mike O’Brien and his wife, Julie, of being awarded funding and support from the Office of Economic Development in order to grow Julie’s small business, Firefly Kitchens. Concerned citizens emailed BNT editors wondering if these allegations were true.

The crux of these suspicious allegations hinges on a 2013 OED Director’s Report, which mentions that the office was assisting Firefly in finding a new location for their expanding business and also preparing an application for a loan.

From the report: “Firefly Kitchens – OED’s Lance Randall and Diana Sasser of the National Development Council met with Richard Climenhage of Firefly Kitchens to discuss his plans to expand operations. Firefly Kitchens is currently located in Ballard and processes fermented food products (such as kimchee and sauerkraut). Their sales have increased by 40 percent and their current location is too small to handle the growth. Lance is assisting the company with finding a new location and Diana is putting together a loan application for equipment and working capital. The relocation is scheduled to take place sometime during the first quarter of 2014.”

Julie is co-owner of Firefly and her business partner was the only person listed in the report. Because of this there were allegations of malfeasance and that the O’Brien’s were the beneficiaries of special treatment from the city.

Yes, this seemed like a fat story at first, especially during election season. However, after looking over public documents and talking to city officials, it turned out to not be true.

According to Joe Mirabella, Communications Director for OED, Firefly never received funding or a loan from the city. Also, Mirabella wasn’t even sure if Firefly had moved because OED had no record of them aside from the report.

Furthermore, Mirabella said that the types of things OED would have helped them with are basic and offered for free to all businesses that inquire. Some of these services consist of providing information for financial opportunities and pointing business owners to leads on available commercial spaces in areas that best fit their needs.

Mirabella could not confirm if anyone in the office knew that Julie O’Brien was co-owner of the business but said, “Even if we did, they would have been given the same service offered to anyone else. … We do not give preferential treatment to people or provide favors. Firefly used the very basic services available to anyone.”

Councilmen Mike O’Brien denied the allegations. He also said that Firefly has not relocated since 2010.

“There’s someone out there that’s trying to smear me. My wife’s business has never received any funding from the city,” said O’Brien.

He did confirm that Firefly approached the city with questions about land use regulations when they first started.

In addition, Wayne Barnett, Executive Director of the Ethics Commission, said that O’Brien had approached the office a few years ago with questions regarding ethical practices associated with city support for spouses.

“Councilmen O'Brien…asked our office for advice on this question a long time ago, and I told him that so long as he stayed far away from OED's process his wife's business was eligible for support from that office on the same terms as any other small business,” wrote Barnett.

Barnett went on to say that in order for there to be an Ethics Code violation, a City officer or employee has to take some action and be involved in some way.

“So there is no breach of the Code for a councilmember's spouse to receive a small business loan, unless the councilmember participates in the City's decision to approve the loan, or otherwise uses his or her influence to make the loan happen.” 
 
After hearing from Barnett it was clear the lead was malarkey. However, one question does remain, and maybe it’s something to be taken up by the Ethics Commission:

With thousands small businesses in the city and council members provided with a more than livable annual salary of $117,000, why is it considered ethical for city council members' spouses/partners to receive any financial support from the City in order to grow a business the council member would eventually financially benefit from – even when a council member separates themselves from the process?

As election season cools off, perhaps the newly elected council will take on this issue.