“ADVOCATE VS. INSIDER”: DE BLASIO “KNEE DEEP IN SLUSH FUND SCANDAL.”
“It’s wrong that 60% of time our taxpayer money ends up as political gifts in his pocket,” says former Public Advocate. “As a lifelong watchdog, I have three specific questions that voters deserve answers to.”
New York – Mark Green today began his run-off campaign for Public Advocate by questioning opponent Bill de Blasio “for the documented fact that he gives away millions from the Council slush fund and then receives back hundreds of thousands in campaign contributions.”
At a City Hall press conference, Green – the City’s first Public Advocate and before that the Consumer Affairs Commissioner – contrasted his history as a consumer advocate fighting for campaign reform with his opponent’s “history as a political insider who abuses the City Council’s Member Item process for enriching his own candidacy.”
A recent study of Council Member Bill de Blasio’s individual Member Item funding to non-profits, totaling over $7 million in the past three years, showed that 60% of the groups gave back political contributions.
“I’ve worked for years on campaign finance reform,” said Green who wrote the 1998 law that established the modern system of matching small gifts with public funds. “We did not at that time expect Council Members like de Blasio to abuse the budget process to milk campaign gifts from taxpayer expenditures. Groups receiving Member Items are usually worthy and honorable, as are their executives, staff and members. But they shouldn’t feel the implicit coercion to contribute to politicians in the belief that’s necessary to receive more funds.”
During the years 2008, 2009 and 2010, which are the only years for which the City Council has released Member Item funding information (without a FOIL lawsuit), de Blasio gave over $7 million in individual Member Items to 131 groups. The Green campaign was able to name at least one officer, board member or employee for 100 of the non-profit groups. Then by comparing the first and last name of each to the first and last names in de Blasio’s New York City Campaign Finance filings, it found that 60% of the groups had members who made political contributions to the Brooklyn councilman.*
“Tainted Money” back:
• $107,300 in contributions from people affiliated with non-profits receiving Member Item funding.
• $99,615 in matching funds were dispersed for these contributions.
• $206,915 in total campaign money generated for de Blasio for Public Advocate.
The return on investment:
• $23,533 from the Brooklyn Bridge Park Conservancy that received $180,000;
• $21,800 from the Prospect Park Alliance that received $156,000;
• $14,057 from the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences/Museum that received $30,000;
• $13,092 from the Brooklyn Academy of Music that received $15,000;
• $10,685 from the Brooklyn Information and Culture that received $20,000; and
• $8,263 from the Brooklyn Philharmonic that received $38,000;
This past July, former Council Member Miguel Martinez plead guilty to using Member Item funding to obtain more than $100,000 in kick backs. Also pleading guilty have been two aides to Council Member Kendall Stewart. The FBI and United States Attorney General are continuing their investigations.
“This looks like a conflict of interest because it is a conflict of interest,” explained Green, who went on to ask three questions of Council Member de Blasio: “Do you support my proposal to ban political gifts from groups receiving Member Item funding from a Council Member? Do you support the proposal of Speaker Christine Quinn and Council Members David Yassky and Dan Garodnick to reform Member Items by including them in a more transparent budget process? Will you return the $206,915 you received in contributions from these favored groups?”
Last month, in his “Change for New York: 100 Ideas for a Better City,” available at http://markgreen.com/100, former Public Advocate Green sought to “protect funding for our neediest New Yorkers by banning quid pro quo donations from employees and members of the boards of not-for profits that receive member item funding.”
*Note: de Blasio donors who were members of multiple groups that received Member Item funding had their contributions split equally between all their groups. While we only engaged in a first and last name match for 75% of the groups for which we found membership information. For the purposes of accuracy and simplicity in this report, we did not include contributions from spouses and family members, which would more than double certain numbers.