Who are the major parties affected, and what are their interests in how the dilemma is resolved?

Please read the article from the link: https://www.newsweek.com/mormon-whistleblower-denounces-brothers-media-leaks-church-responds-100-billion-tithing-1478647 and answer the following questions below:1. What are the relevant facts? (Although many situations are seemingly complex, there may be only a small number of facts that are genuinely germane.) 2. Who are the major parties affected, and what are their interests in how the dilemma is resolved? 3. What are the ethical values that are in question? How do they rank in importance? Examples of these values include • Honesty and integrity • Loyalty and obligations to colleagues • Responsibilities to family • Obligation to make full and fair disclosures to appropriate parties • Loyalty and other obligations to one’s employer • Responsibilities as a citizen • Pursuit of excellence4. What are the alternative courses of action? 5. What are the consequences of each course of action? Which values would have to be sacrificed or compromised?**********************************************************Below is the SAMPLE of one Article and the answer:The following example illustrates how these questions may be applied to a specific ethical dilemma.ExampleJames Klavan is a city’s assistant comptroller. Within the last year, the comptroller established an enterprise fund to account for the operation of the city’s golf course. Previously, the course had been accounted for in the general fund. GAAP permits government flexibility as to the types of funds in which it may account for activities financed by user charges. There is no question that under those principles, golf course operations may be accounted for in either a governmental fund or an enterprise fund. The main reason for the change was to shift expenses out of the general fund and thereby help to eliminate a general fund deficit. Were it not for the accounting change, the general fund deficit would have to be offset by increased taxes or reductions in services. However, if the reasons for the change were made public, city officials would unquestionably be charged by political opponents with fiscal gimmickry. The city comptroller was approached by a reporter covering the publication of the city’s annual report. Owing to time constraints, the comptroller referred him to Klavan, his assistant. In the course of an interview, the reporter (who couldn’t distinguish a debit from a credit) asked Klavan to explain the change and indicate its significance. Klavan is uncertain how to respond. 1. Relevant facts a. The comptroller established an enterprise fund to reduce the reported general fund deficit. b. Klavan is aware of the reason for the change and is asked by a reporter for an explanation of its significance. c. Although the change is permissible under GAAP, it was made to eliminate a general fund deficit and thereby avert either increases in taxes or reductions in services. d. Disclosure of the true reason for the change would embarrass both Klavan’s immediate superior and the city administration. 2. Major parties affected (other than Klavan) a. The comptroller, who stands to be embarrassed if the reason for the change were made public b. The reporter, who presumably expects a full and fair explanation of the change c. The citizenry, who might be misled by the change (yet might nevertheless support it if it would avert a tax increase or service reduction) 3. Ethical values in conflict a. Loyalty to colleagues and employer (both the comptroller and the city administration) b. Honesty (to reporter) c. Obligation to make full and fair disclosures to appropriate parties d. Responsibilities as a citizen (either to prevent the city from misleading its citizens or, by contrast, to facilitate a means of averting tax increases) 4. Possible courses of action available to Klavan a. Explain the change to the reporter, but obfuscate the reason for it. b. Explain the change and reveal the underlying reason for it. c. Delay responding to the reporter, and tell the comptroller that he will not meet with the reporter unless the comptroller explicitly gives him permission to reveal the reason for the change.5. Consequences of actions a. If Klavan explains the change to the reporter without revealing the reasons for it, he will not be providing full disclosure and will thereby be intentionally misleading. Moreover, he will be allowing his employer (both the comptroller and the city administration) to deceive the citizenry. b. If he explains the change and reveals the underlying reason for it, he will embarrass both the comptroller and the city (and thereby place his career with the city at risk). c. If he confronts the comptroller and indicates that he will meet with the reporter only if granted permission to reveal the underlying reason for the change, then he will place the comptroller in an uncomfortable position (by suggesting that the comptroller is being deceitful) and thereby jeopardize his relationship with the comptroller and consequently his career with the city.