Let's look at the facts: Sometime in the last few days Olympian reporter Matt Batcheldor received an anonymous tip (I have a very short list as to who the tipper was, but of course it's unverifiable) that Hogan had possibly violated PDC rules in her campaign spending. After receiving the tip, Batcheldor then called the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC). Here is the first sentence of Batcheldor's article:

"Olympia mayoral candidate Meta Hogan is under scrutiny from the state Public Disclosure Commission for spending campaign donors' money on questionable items — including cigarettes for herself."

The fact is that Meta Hogan was not under scrutiny at all. According to PDC Communications Officer Lori Anderson, the PDC had received no complaints about Hogan and that a call by The Olympian's Editorial Page Editor Mike Oakland was the first contact they'd received. Oakland spoke to PDC assistant director Doug Ellis, who confirms the conversation and also stated that this was the first contact they had received regarding Hogan's campaign spending.

Ellis explained that if there are questionable expenses, the process starts with a form letter to the candidate asking for a justification for the spending, not what he would categorize as an investigation. When asked if Batcheldor's lead sentence accurately reflects the actions of the PDC Ellis stated, "I suppose if they want to call it scrutiny they could, but really it's no more than asking them (the candidate) for an explanation."

If after that initial letter is sent out, a candidate provides an explanation that passes muster with the PDC, then all is dropped. Ellis clearly stated that there was no investigation into Hogan's campaign spending at this time.

According to Hogan Campaign Treasurer Pat Tassoni, as soon as a question arose about Hogan's spending he and Hogan headed to the PDC office where they spoke with Lead Filer Assistance Specialist Sally Parker in order to clarify things. After hearing about some of the expenses in question, Parker advised that perhaps the cigarettes would not be considered acceptable after a review by the PDC. "At that point", Hogan said, "I asked what we could do about it." Parker explained that the easiest thing to do would be to simply pay back her campaign for the "questionable" expenses and update her PDC forms to reflect the changes. Assistant Director Ellis confirmed, "That would probably solve any potential problems."

It appears that Meta Hogan's honesty caught up with her. According to PDC rules a candidate is not required to disclose any expenses under $50, all of her expenses in question were under that amount. According to Hogan she chose to report everything because she believes that "everyone that seeks public office should be accountable to the public to the highest degree possible".