Voters have more choices than to just vote Gov. Cuomo out of office after he corrupted the Moreland Commission [UPDATED]

PUBLISHED : THURS, 24 JUL 2014, 11:31 PM
UPDATED : SAT, 26 JUL 2014, 08:30 PM

The demise of the Moreland Commission : The high price of avoiding a fundamental overhaul of the broken political system

In the lengthy The New York Times report about the Cuomo administration's relentless obstruction of the independent investigations once being conducted by the now-defunct Moreland Commission, the newspaper of record finally named names : that Gov. Andrew Cuomo was apparently serving the best interests of large campaign contributors -- amongst them, the Real Estate Board of New York ; the Extell Development Company, developer of the $2 billion luxury condominium tower on West 57th Street in Midtown Manhattan ; and the donors to the Committee to Save New York, a controversial 501(c)(4) charity group that acted as Gov. Cuomo's political arm -- instead of the best interests of voters.

As federal prosecutors piece together the pattern of activities over a period of time that may have broken state or federal laws, which form the corrupt political machinations that thwarted subpoenas, concealed political activities, and altered reports -- leading to the politically-motivated, premature closure of the Moreland Commission to Investigate Public Corruption, voters are left having to examine the high price society pays to keep corrupt politicians, like Gov. Cuomo, in office. What keeps the broken political system so corrupt and corruptible ?

With the media fallout from the lengthy article in The New York Times and a possible federal investigation threatening to end Gov. Cuomo's political career, voters will probably not be shocked, once they learn the answer.

view this map on LittleSis

Intimidating, retaliating, and controlling officials or witnesses Gov. Cuomo's power, it is now being revealed, stems from his control-freak nature, his need to badger his opponents into submission, his need to stack the political deck in his favor from the outset. One way he does that is by relying on help from powerful lobbying groups, like the Real Estate Board of New York, or REBNY as it is known for short. REBNY is a powerful lobbying group of extremely wealthy real estate developers. They are also a source of large campaign contributions at both the city and state levels. The lengthy article in The New York Times was perhaps the second time over the course of a decade when REBNY got singled out for scrutiny for its role in packaging large campaign contributions to political candidates in apparent exchange for special, insider access to government officials, who determine government policy or shape laws that impact the real estate industry. The last noteworthy time when The New York Times came close to outing REBNY was when reporters identified real estate developers as amongst the largest campaign contributors to the early-identified New York City mayoral candidates in the 2009 election cycle. Real estate developers were rushing to donate maximum amounts of campaign contributions before new restrictions were set to take place, which would limit the amount of money that business interests seeking business before the city could donate to candidates for public office. That previous article was a reflection of the realities in New York City politics, namely, that when real estate developers seek municipal approval for zone-busting real estate projects -- from the controversial, tax-payer assisted Hundson Yards project, to the $1 billion luxury condo conversion of St. Vincent's Hospital -- the city's politicians always acquiesce to developers' demands. Money not only buys insider access, but it apparently buys approvals of the city's development permitting process, a fact that The New York Times doesn't always make clear. Obfuscation is the trick that keeps voters in the dark to the pattern in political corruption. Some of the same corrupt developers, who donate to Gov. Cuomo, also make campaign contributions to municipal politicians, all in an effort to game the broken political system. Two members of the Rudin family, owners of Rudin Management Company, made campaign contributions to Gov. Cuomo's campaign committee in the sum of $35,000. Other contributions, totaling $50,000, originated from a limited partnership in the name of the address of a Rudin office building on Park Avenue. The leader of the Rudin family is William Rudin, a board of director of both REBNY and a powerful Chamber of Commerce-like group known as the Partnership for New York City, or PFNYC for short. In the 2009 New York City mayoral election cycle alone, owners of Rudin Management Company made contributions nearly totaling $30,000 to the campaign committee of former City Council Speaker Christine Quinn. These campaign contributions were made in the lead-up to Rudin's application for what eventually became a $1 billion luxury condo conversion of St. Vincent's Hospital. The hospital, in Speaker Quinn's Council district, needed her approval in order for the rest of the City Council to act in nearly unanimous lockset to rubber-stamp Rudin's zone-busting permit application. Tens and tens of thousand dollars in campaign contributions explains why healthcare activists heard, "We'll see you after the election," from the Cuomo camp in 2010, and heard nothing from former Speaker Quinn after her troubled reelection in 2009. A decade ago, when the wealthy landlords of several of the city's Mitchell-Lama buildings were contemplating exiting the affordable housing program, REBNY lobbied the New York City Council -- and won -- a package of low-cost loans for the wealthy landlords that did nothing to expand affordable housing to New Yorkers. Instead, the financial benefit of such packages, on top of existing Mitchell-Lama subsidies and tax breaks, was to pad the bottom line of the city's wealthy Mitchell-Lama landlords, and that decade-old, low-cost loan package was spun as a way to incentivize wealthy Mitchell-Lama landlords to voluntarily remain in the affordable housing program without any newly-won guaranteed rent caps, much less rent reductions, for low- and moderate-income tenants. Whatever REBNY wants, REBNY gets. To the corrupt enablers of the broken political system, reforms, of any kind, need to be blocked Overseeing REBNY for almost three decades now has been Steven Spinola. In the lengthy report in The New York Times, Mr. Spinola was singled out for having written a controversial memo to REBNY members, asking the membership to make campaign contributions to Democrats in the State Assembly, a move that the Moreland Commission's chief of investigations, E. Danya Perry, found to be indicative that large campaign contributors believed that making political donations could determine legislative outcomes. The wealthy landlords and developers, who comprise REBNY, invest tens of thousands of dollars in political candidates over the course of their careers, amounts that can sometimes reach six figures for a single politician. Like all bean counters, real estate interests expect a return for this investment. That's why no major zone-busting real estate development has ever been turned down in New York City over the last decade or so, with the possible exception of former Mayor Michael Bloomberg's plan for a West Side stadium. That project was doomed from the start, because it would have competed with the wealthy Dolan family's interests in Madison Square Garden. In New York real estate circles, wealthy interests rarely want to create conflict between competing interests, because any conflict would draw scrutiny to the unseemly lobbying process that developers would rather keep below the public's radar. Fixing the outcome of zone-busting real estate permit applications depends on keeping the broken political system in place, where large campaign contributions can have an influence in legislative or zoning application processes -- outcomes upon which big business interests can rely. According to the lengthy report in The New York Times about the demise of the Moreland Commission, Gov. Cuomo was trying to avoid any scrutiny of his real estate supporters, for example, the REBNY lobbying group or Extell, the real estate developer. Like Rudin, Extell is another wealthy real estate development company that has made sizable campaign contributions on both the municipal and state levels. A partial listing of campaign contributions by individuals with connections to Extell shows that over $16,000 in campaign contributions were made to former Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign committee and that a partial listing of still yet other donations were made to Mayor de Blasio's winning mayoral campaign committee of at least $6,000. More on the role of Extell on influencing building policy under the de Blasio administration later. On top of trying to avoid scrutiny of developers, Gov. Cuomo and his enablers, including Regina Calcaterra, manipulated the workings or censored the work product of the Moreland Commission. Even though the Moreland Commission has been shut for several months, some media reports indicate that Gov. Cuomo continues to pay Ms. Calcaterra her full executive director salary, even though the commission is now disbanded, raising questions amongst political bloggers as to what exactly Gov. Cuomo is paying Ms. Calcaterra to do, i.e., remain quiet about the background political machinations that drove the Moreland Commission into the ground ? But the corruptive influence that appears to drive the political machinations for the Cuomo administration is not limited to the real estate industry. Another group, the PFNYC, has also exerted great influence in the Cuomo administration, according to government reform activists. The PFNYC is a powerful group of business executives from some of the nation's largest corporations, which operate out of New York City. Together, REBNY and the PFNYC were heavily involved in the Committee to Save New York, or CSNY for short, a pro-Cuomo charity group that raised over $16 million in contributions to advocate in support of several political issues. CSNY disbanded before the group was required to disclose the sources of its contributions. The PFNYC, a member group of CSNY, is headed by Kathryn Wylde, the media's go-to-person for pro-business talking points. Ms. Wylde was a chief advisor to former Speaker Quinn, according to one political blogger, and her influence can be felt across the political spectrum in New York government. Although Gov. Cuomo vehemently denied that he was a shill for the PFNYC, there's no realistic way possible that pro-business groups would raise over $16 million and spend most of it on TV commercials supporting the Cuomo administration's agenda if the pro-business groups weren't expecting something in return. When Gov. Cuomo denies a quid pro quo on a scale of this magnitude, he is not being fully forthcoming with voters. That Mr. Spinola at REBNY and Ms. Wylde at the PFNYC can raise these amounts of contributions without public scrutiny is tantamount to government, but yet nobody calls for an end to the loopholes that allow lobbying groups to game the political system in their favour. No elected official, not even those whose campaign planks purportedly represent "progressive" values, dare to close the loopholes and champion for campaign finance reforms. No politician on the take from wealthy landlords or real estate developers dares to overhaul the corrupt municipal process that reviews billion-dollar zone-busting real estate development deals known as the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, or ULURP for short. Here's why. Millions of dollars in 501(c)(4) money and hundreds of thousands in campaign contributions are meant to block reforms The only way that big business interests can keep fixing the outcome of permit applications and legislative processes is keep in place a system where only big money campaign contributors get insider access to elected officials. This is the roadblock to a complete overhaul of the broken political system, and it is this roadblock that very few media outlets fully expose. The lengthy article about Gov. Cuomo's backroom machinations to sabotage the Moreland Commission named a few names, like Mr. Spinola, REBNY, Extell, and the CSNY. But notice how Ms. Wylde and the PFNYC were left out. Also left out were the possible corrupting influence of $17,500 in campaign contributions made to Gov. Cuomo's campaign committee from the wealthy Kestenbaum family, founders of the Fortis Property Group, which eventually won the zone-busting development rights to convert Long Island College Hospital, or LICH, into what could amount to a billion dollar luxury condo complex in the fancy Cobble Hill section of Brooklyn. Official government policy outcomes always match the relentless pattern of campaign donations. The fix is in. For years, thousands of healthcare activist from across New York City have been frustrated by newspaper articles by the hospital beat reporter, Anemona Hartocollis, who has never -- not even once -- mentioned how big real estate developers are corruptive influences that secretly cheer for the early closure of community hospitals across the city in order to bid pennies on the dollar for redevelopment rights to real estate sites that can gross revenues of several hundred millions to perhaps into the billions. Behind the media bias in articles like these, many healthcare activists and political bloggers believe, are the powerful business interests of REBNY and the PFNYC. It isn't just big business interests, which try to influence the media to disconnect the dots back to big business interests ; elected officials don't want that kind of scrutiny, either, because of the paper trail that large campaign donations link elected officials back to big business interests. If in respect of the Moreland Commission, the governor was able to successfully steer the Moreland Commission members away from troublesome links to the CSNY, then it wouldn't be that much more difficult for big business interests and elected officials to team up to steer the media away from troublesome links between former Speaker Quinn and Rudin Management Company in respect of the $1 billion luxury condo conversion of St. Vincent's. Behind why voters can be deceived is the unshakeable public perception that the media does not fully report the whole truth about political corruption. The voter anger at former Speaker Quinn in her own Council district in 2011 was a harbinger that her political career was over. This voter anger was never fully reflected in media reports at the time. A close parallel to today is the growing political anger in Brooklyn, which is now directed at Mayor Bill de Blasio, over the closure of LICH in his very own borough. After the lessons learned from the spectacular failure of former Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign, some media outlets have woken up to the voter dissatisfaction that hospital closures create amongst voters, meaning the sense of Mayor de Blasio's betrayal of the LICH community is slowly emanating from Brooklyn to the rest of the city, but still no thanks to key reporters at The New York Times, like Ms. Hartocollis. The larger story about hospital closings, which the media fails to report, is that Gov. Cuomo exacerbated these hospital closings under his controversial Medicaid Redesign Team, a panel that was steered to recommend draconian cuts to Medicaid, so much so that some of the Medicaid cuts are now being challenged in court. The hospital closings made under the Medicaid Redesign Team were spearheaded by Gov. Cuomo's hatchet man and Wall Street banker, Stephen Berger, but this fact is not widely reported by the media, misleading voters into thinking that hospitals are failing for business or commercial reasons, instead of the fact that hospital closures are actually central to Gov. Cuomo's austerity program. It's not that former Speaker Quinn or Mayor de Blasio are excused for their failed efforts to save St. Vincent's or LICH, for example, but that former Speaker Quinn and Mayor de Blasio have refused to fully educate voters about the power play dynamics playing out in political back rooms, decisions they make no doubt under the influence of big money contributions by real estate interests vying for lucrative luxury condo conversions of the real estate assets of failed hospitals. Voters don't fully see the truth about the corrupt decisions government makes, and one lengthy article in The New York Times about Gov. Cuomo's corrupt machinations to undermine the Moreland Commission isn't enough and doesn't repeat facts enough times, for the necessary messages to permeate throughout the electorate. Indeed, voters found out too late how Gov. Cuomo's office had managed to intimidate the former Albany Bureau Chief and the former political editor of The New York Times, a political machination, which may explain why some government reform activists rightly perceived a bias from former metropolitan editor Carolyn Ryan, who espoused a bias in support of the political marionettes of the PFNYC, like former Speaker Quinn. Meet some of the victims targeted by the broken political system enabled by Gov. Cuomo and his supporters : Whistleblowers, activists, voters, and even some government officials On the same day when Seema Kalia was set to testify before the Moreland Commission in 2013, at the invitation of Ms. Calcaterra, Ms. Kalia says, she was arrested and hauled to Rikers Island, where she was locked up for almost six months. Ms. Kalia's arrest prevented her from testifying before the Moreland Commission about financial improprieties, which, she says, involved institutions, such as Trinity School and the law firm Wachtel Lipton Rosen & Katz, with political ties that could be traced back to Gov. Cuomo. Prior to her arrest and incarceration, Ms. Kalia provided a summary of her expected testimony to Ms. Calcaterra during a telephone conversation that they had shared. The issues of corruption, which Ms. Kalia expected to bring before the Moreland Commission involved potential tax improprieties, amongst other issues. Ms. Kalia had attempted to reach out to the Moreland Commission with her information after the district attorney for Manhattan, Cyrus Vance, refused to investigate, Ms. Kalia said. Like with other whistleblowers, who had separately tried to directly contact Moreland Commission members about corruption after local authorities refused to investigate, the Moreland Commission never formally promised to investigate Ms. Kalia's referral. Part of the retribution Ms. Kalia has had to endure since blowing the whistle on corruption has been the loss of custody of her children, some political activists believe. Under normal circumstances, it would be difficult to believe that the Cuomo administration or the institutions implicated in Ms. Kalia's testimony would go to great lengths to retaliate against a witness, but the Cuomo administration has a definite pattern of hostility toward whistleblowers. In 2013, Gov. Cuomo's director of state operations, Howard Glaser, publicly excoriated a state engineer, Mike Fayette, in an act of public retaliation for Mr. Fayette's unauthorized communication with the press. The year before, the Cuomo administration objected to a critic of the state’s Office for People With Developmental Disabilities, Jeffrey Monsour, being appointed to serve on a panel discussion on developmental disabilities. The Cuomo administration reversed its objection after criticisms of the administration's backlack were published by The New York Times. Also in 2012, Gov. Cuomo himself publicly retaliated against Ravi Batra, a founding member of the state's Joint Commission on Public Ethics, or JCOPE for short, creating a hostile environment for Mr. Batra, who resigned in protest over allegations that Gov. Cuomo attempted to steer control over JCOPE. From compromising the investigations of the Moreland Commission or JCOPE to retaliating against whistleblowers, these are examples of a pattern of corrupting political activities relating to Gov. Cuomo's obsession with keeping his official acts in alignment with the expectations of big business donors to his campaign committee. The unmistakable pattern of political activities points to how the Cuomo administration seeks to manipulate or restrict the communication by whistleblowers or state employees set to speak before panels or with the media. Retaliation is commonplace. Like each of Mr. Monsour, Mr. Fayette, and Mr. Batra, Ms. Kalia has been excoriated in the media. As federal prosecutors reportedly investigate the political machinations of the Cuomo administration to thwart the investigations of the Moreland Commission, left unreported is how are each of these whistleblowers going to receive justice. Will Ms. Kalia see her charges investigated and her children returned ? Will Mr. Monsour and Mr. Fayette be guaranteed workplaces that are free of hostility and retaliation ? Can the other commissioners serving on JCOPE be assured of independence from the Cuomo administration ? And can the Cuomo administration amend its public statements about Mr. Batra, to restore public confidence in the integrity of whistleblowers like him ? The Cuomo administration's apparent political backlash directed at critics isn't isolated to a few, vocal activists. The broken political system overseen by Gov. Cuomo and enabled by his generous campaign contributors also runs rough shod over large sections of the general public. Residents of low income housing, for example, become ensnared, too. Extell, the real estate developer, was founded and is headed by Gary Barnett, a member of REBNY's executive committee and board of governors. Mr. Barnett through his company, Extell, is represented in the media by the lobbyist and campaign consultant, George Arzt. Mr. Arzt is a controversial figure in New York politics, because, over the last several years, he has made over $90,000 in campaign contributions to various politicians, knowing that money is the corrupt grease the spins the squeaky wheels of government. Recently, Extell won approval from the city's Department of Housing Preservation and Development to segregate tenants of affordable housing units to through separate entrances of apartment buildings. The separate entrances approved for low- and moderate-income tenants is colloquially referred to as the "poor door." How could the de Blasio-Mark-Viverito administration, one which likes to advertise its "progressive" aspirations, approve such a regressive and discriminatory practise ? It all comes down to the influence that large campaign contributions by donors, like Extell, and the corrupting influence of lobbyists, such as Mr. Arzt, exert over the political process. Since Gov. Cuomo is owned by Extell, the Democratic governor is in no position to check the de Blasio-Mark-Viverito's new "poor door" policy, effectively leaving unchallenged Extell's discriminatory new entrance policy. The announcement of Extell's controversial new policy came as Mayor de Blasio was departing for a 10-day vacation that includes stops along the Italian Riviera. Real estate developers get exactly what they want. Left unchecked, the broken political system that allows even corruption-fighting investigation panels, like the Moreland Commission and JCOPE, to become corrupted, works to further undermine the public's faith in the democratic process and in the judicial system. Who will volunteer to serve on future Moreland Commissions if high-ranking state officials can obstruct the commissioners' independent investigations ? Ms. Perry, the Moreland Commission's former chief of investigations, fought back against the meddling by the Cuomo administration. Now, Ms. Perry, as well as other Moreland Commission members, such as Kathleen Rice and William Fitzpatrick, may very well have to account for their actions before federal prosecutors, a task that will no doubt clear the names of some, based on the reporting of the Cuomo administration's serial acts of obstruction. However, this is an undue burden that should not have to accompany public service, and it will act to deter future public servants from coming forward to accept similar government appointments. Also left unexamined is why Gov. Cuomo chose the vehicle of a Moreland Commission to conduct his investigation into corruption in Albany. Why a Moreland Commission, and why not task the state's attorney general's office with this task ? Again, the public is left in the dark about the political machinations that touch upon the state's judicial system. The state attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, holds an elected office. To run for office, Mr. Schneiderman seeks the endorsement of the same corrupt political operatives that are responsible for enabling government and campaign corruption. Mr. Schneiderman seeks endorsements from the county chairs of the Democratic Party, political clubs, and other politically-active nonprofit groups. Mr. Schneiderman relies up campaign consultants and political lobbyists for electioneering work, and Mr. Schneiderman must raise campaign contributions to fund an expensive state-wide election campaign. Two readily-identifiable limited liability companies related to the real estate developer Tishman Speyer bundled at least $70,000 in campaign contributions to Mr. Schniederman's 2014 campaign committee. Rob Speyer is Co-Chief Executive Officer of Tishman Speyer, and he also serves as Chairman of REBNY. Anytime an office holder must rely upon contributions to a campaign committee, that generally opens the door to that elected official being potentially owned by his or her campaign contributors or other political operatives. Indeed, as the political scandal of the demise of the Moreland Commission has befallen upon the Cuomo administration, Mr. Schneiderman, who himself appointed some of the commissioners, has made the politically-calculated move to remain silent, to the detriment of voters' interests. The same criticisms apply to the various local district attorneys around New York State. Any of these local district attorneys could have opened up investigations into the various examples of government or campaign corruption across New York state, but the district attorneys don't, for the very same reasons that the state's attorney general is conflicted about investigating and prosecuting cases of government or campaign corruption : cases consisting of violations of local or state law that involve the potential for the prosecution of significant political or government individuals pose special problems for local and state prosecutors, precisely because local and state prosecutors belong to the same corrupt political system that breeds government and campaign corruption, leaving only federal prosecutors relatively independent enough to mount such investigations and to bring such cases, if warranted. Given how the Obama administration has politicized the Department of Justice, government reform activists and political bloggers are gambling that Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for New York's Southern District, has the fortitude to see through a massive investigation into government and campaign corruption that could potentially yield a once-in-a-century renewal in government integrity. The false choice proposed by The New York Times On the day the lengthy report was published in The New York Times, the media worked itself into a stampede, hopping on the bandwagon to report about the Cuomo administration's apparent obstruction of justice in the proceedings of the Moreland Commission. The day after, the editorial board of The New York Times published an editorial, presenting voters with a choice : keeping their elected representatives in office, or voting them out. This is a false choice. Voters don't just have a choice to vote out corrupt elected officials. They also have a choice to demand an overhaul of this broken political system. The continued short-sightedness by The New York Times points to how voters are not fully informed about the true depths of corruption in government. In last year's mayoral election, the voter backlash against the perceptions of community betrayal and public corruption during the 15 years of former Speaker Quinn's political career became co-opted by a Super PAC, NYC Is Not For Sale. The voter backlash and the Super PAC's co-opting measures played out for the public and the media to see. However, the media was limited in its ability to fully scrutinize the behind-the-scenese political activities and finances of the Super PAC, which were apparently being coordinated with official campaign committees and which involved controversial sources of funding and the sharing of other resources that cast questions about impropriety and possible illegality over the activities of the Super PAC. But these questions were largely raised after it was too late -- either after Mayor de Blasio had taken the lead in opinion polls or after he had won the Democratic mayoral primary. The deliberate lack of media scrutiny of Mayor de Blasio's campaign resulted in voters getting another neoliberal hack Democrat for mayor, who espouses the racist broken windows theory of policing and whose administration approves separate-but-equal poor doors for residents of affordable housing units. Similarly, just voting Gov. Cuomo out of office based on voter backlash to his record of corruption and neoliberalism isn't enough. Voters must elect a change agent outside of the corrupt two-party system. Leftists need to leave the Democratic Party. As advocated by this blog, voters are encouraged to look at the record of Green Party gubernatorial candidate Howie Hawkins. Mr. Hawkins' campaign platform calls for ideas that would overhaul the broken political system by ending opportunities for corruption. His proposals for reform include a Clean Money bill that would fund full public campaign financing, meaning, a ban would have to be instituted on all private campaign donations. This radical step is the only way to cut out the undue influence of Mr. Spinola, REBNY, 501(c)(4) charity groups like the CSNY and the mayor's corrupt Campaign for One New York, Ms. Wylde, the PFNYC, Extell, Rudin Management Company, and other big money campaign contributors that enable corrupt politicians, like Gov. Cuomo, therefore keeping the political system broken and corruptible to big money donors. Even in the face of one week's worth of intense media scrutiny and even a possible federal investigation, big money real estate interests have cavalierly denounced any intention to stop funding big money donations to politicians, like Mr. Cuomo. REBNY is unapologetic for apparently fixing the legislative outcomes based on their large campaign contributions. While you check out Mr. Hawkins' platform, look up other issues you care about. You might find his untethered approach to overhauling the corrupt political system refreshing. If Mr. Hawkins campaign is not for you, then please support a campaign with idea that match his for boldness. Voters have more options than just voting Gov. Cuomo out of office.

RELATED Cuomo’s Office Hobbled Ethics Inquiries by Moreland Commission (The New York Times) Gov. Cuomo’s Broken Promises (The New York Times)

Public Advocate Letitia James better be ready to stand in for Mayor de Blasio, at the rate he's flouting campaign finance laws

How much longer can the mayor and his army of lobbyists violate the spirit of campaign finance laws, before they trigger possible corruption investigations ?

Funneling campaign-like donations to Mayor de Blasio's political arm through shady limited liability corporations JUST ONE WEEK AFTER Mayor Bill de Blasio's controversial 501(c)(4) charity group, the Campaign for One New York, published its list of donations and expenditures, drawing heavy media scrutiny and criticism from good government groups, The New York Post reported that firms with ties to unions seeking favorable school bus union contracts made stealth contributions to the mayor's shady nonprofit group partly through the use of cloaking corporations or relatives of principal owners of bus companies. One bus company with $90 million in contracts, Careful Bus Co., made contributions to the mayor's political charity of almost $10,000 through a number of pass-through entities, including 88th Street Self Storage Inc. and First Investors Equipment Leasing Corp., according to The New York Post. Another donation made to the mayor's charity came from a bus company with approximately $110 million in contracts, L&M Bus, and L&M Bus made its contribution of $15,000 through a limited liability company acting as a pass-through entity, Stable Realty LLC. The LLC shares the same Brooklyn address as L&M Bus. Other contributions from bus company-related entities were made by the brothers Chris and Joseph Termini, who made contributions of $10,000 without disclosing their ownership interests in two transportation firms they own. Another contribution to the mayor's charity was made from Richard Caparella, who is the brother-in-law of Careful Bus co-owner Marty Hoffman. BerlinRosen, which managed Mr. de Blasio’s successful mayoral campaign and is now managing the mayor's political arm, the Campaign for One New York, refused to comment on fundraising irregularities noted in the review by The New York Post of the Campaign for One New York's finances. Government reform activists are only now beginning to see how arrogant the de Blasio administration is when it comes to flouting the spirit of campaign finance laws. Last week, when the press began to scrutinize the finances of the Campaign for One New York, many good government groups denounced the mayor's dependence on big money contributions to his political nonprofit group. “It makes it seem as if public policy and the people’s business is up for sale to the largest bidder,” Susan Lerner, the executive director of Common Cause New York, told The New York Times. Mayor de Blasio's reliance on funneling campaign-like donations from big money interests through limited liability corporations is reminiscent of the same loophole used by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a program that has come under further scrutiny by the press for allowing structuring campaign contributions in a way to violate campaign finance regulations and on contribution limits. Already, a political operative with close ties to the mayor, Scott Levenson, is reportedly under investigation for allegedly coordinating political activities between official campaigns he managed with the political activities of political action committees, which is a violation of campaign finance laws. The pattern of political activities surrounding the mayor have also drawn further criticisms. A new Sienna College poll published this week shows that nearly two-thirds of New Yorkers believe that state politicians are corrupt. So far nobody has looked into how voters perceive municipally-elected officials, although we may have some insight from one of the elected officials' peers. When Public Advocate Letitia James was campaigning for Rep. Charles Rangel in June, Ms. James reminded a crowd at Memorial Baptist Church in Harlem of her leadership experience and her position in the line of succession to the Iron Throne at City Hall. “If anything should happen to Mayor Bill de Blasio,” she said, “you are looking at the next mayor of the City of New York.”

RELATED School bus firms try to hide $40K in donations to mayoral nonprofit (The New York Post) Bill’s cash grab : The mayor sidelines political-money controls he once praised (The New York Daily News) Campaign For One New York Lobbying Group Adopts de Blasio’s Agenda (The New York Times) Lobbying Group Aiding de Blasio Spent $1.7 Million in First Half of 2014 (The New York Times) Alarm raised about ‘‘dark money’’ behind de Blasio’s LICH - Fortis letter (The Brooklyn Daily Eagle) The Campaign for One New York has received a total of $1.7 million in less than seven months - and about three-quarters of that, $1.2 million, came from just five donors (The New York Daily News) Campaign for One New York Raised Nearly $1.8 Million to Coordinate Political Activities In Support of de Blasio's Agenda (The Wall Street Journal) Voters Are Not Surprised When Albany Pols Get Indicted, Siena Poll Says (The New York Observer) Public Advocate Letitia James ready to step up during Mayor de Blasio's Italian vacation (The New York Daily News) NYC Campaign Finance Board to Fernando Cabrera: Give back our money (The New York Daily News)

US Ambassador to South Africa meddling in New York politics -- again

Patrick Gaspard is back to his old political tricks, with more possible violations of the Hatch Act

The unrelenting political activities of a U.S. State Department ambassador to prop up the Democratic Party's political machine in New York America's ambassador to the nation of South Africa, Patrick Gaspard, is once again engaging is political activities that some critics say may violate a federal law that prohibits such involvement by federal government employees. Ambassador Gaspard has been engaged in behind-the-scenes political machinations to support the candidacy of Michael Blake, who is campaigning to seek the New York State Assembly seat vacated by Eric Stevenson after he was convicted of bribery in January, The New York Post reports, adding that, Mr. Blake is a "protégé" of Mr. Gaspard. The federal Hatch Act aims to limit the ability of U.S. politicians to use federal employees for activities of political parties. This reform stemmed from allegations that Democratic Party officials exploited government employees for political gain during the New Deal, but the electioneering regulation restricts federal employees, with few exceptions, from all political parties from engaging in political activities. This isn't the first time that Ambassador Gaspard has flouted Hatch Act regulations. Today's article in The New York Post mentions that prior to reportedly lobbying the healthcare union SEIU 1199 into endorsing Mr. Blake, Ambassador Gaspard was engaged in political activities in support of the reelection campaign for Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY). Prior to that, a New York Republican Party political operative, E. O'Brien Murray, lodged a Hatch Act complaint with the State Department, accusing Ambassador Gaspard, a former top White House aide and the former top political operative with SEIU 1199, of violating restrictions on political activities by getting involved last year in Bill de Blasio's mayoral campaign. Ambassador Gaspard appeared to further flout the Hatch Act by reportedly lobbying in favor of City Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito's selection as the new Council speaker. All of Ambassador Gaspard's electioneering activities were conducted while serving as an ambassador under the U.S. State Department. How many times will prosecutors, intent on cleaning up corruption in New York politics, keep allowing Ambassador Gaspard a green light to exploit his office, position of influence, and federal resources accorded to him in relation to his position in the U.S. State Department, if any, for electioneering activities to benefit Democratic Party candidates for public office ?

RELATED State assembly candidate Michael Blake’s ‘ragged’ efforts for ‘hope and change’ (The New York Post) GOP Operative Files Hatch Act Complaint Against U.S. Ambassador Patrick Gaspard (The New York Daily News)

Will NYPD Commish Bratton be forced to resign over Eric Garner's violent, choking death ?

Community anger escalating over NYPD's continued obsession with "broken windows theory" of policing that appears to justify police brutality, and even violent deaths, for low-level crimes.

Five months before Eric Garner was choked to death by police on Staten Island, ex-Marine Jerome Murdough died while being incarcerated at Riker's Island.

Eric Garner died in a chokehold by NYPD on Staten Island on July 17. Do the officers of the New York Police Department get to decide if the suspects of low-level crimes deserve a death sentence on the spot ? That's the question many political bloggers are asking this week-end, as Mayor Bill de Blasio heads for the isle of Capri in the aftermath of the NYPD's choking death of married Staten Island dad, Eric Garner, 43. During last year's mayoral election, then candidate Bill de Blasio campaigned on promises to end policing tactics that unfairly targeted the poor and people of color. But then after he won the mayoral election, mayor-elect de Blasio swiftly made clear that he was appointing William Bratton as his new police commissioner, a signal of coming broken campaign promises on police reform. Mr. Bratton has a long history of stoking racial tensions by championing a controversial approach to policing known by the moniker, "broken windows." Under this policing theory, the cops target very low-level crimes before larger crimes are committed. But such an approach has been extremely controversial with civil rights activists, communities of color, and political bloggers, because the NYPD's obsession with combatting crime is focusing all of its resources on people suspected of committing very low-level offenses, like privately selling single cigarettes, as Mr. Garner was accused of doing, instead of major criminals. For example, former Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes has been accused of using millions of dollars of confiscated criminal assets to pay for a campaign spokesman, Mortimer Matz. Yet, Mr. Hynes remains free, even those these accusations have been reported and repeated through valid media outlets through out New York state. While government reform activists wait for the NYPD to arrest former D.A. Hynes for the larceny of over $1 million, Mr. Garner is imposed an immediate death sentence for trying to sell single cigarettes for 50¢. Jerome Murdough died on Feb. 15 while being incarcerated at Riker's Island. But Mr. Garner's death is not the first time when the city's law enforcement has been accused of causing the death of an innocent person under the de Blasio-Bratton administration. Last February, a former U.S. Marine died while in law enforcement custody at Riker's Island. Like with Mr. Garner's situation, the former Marine, Jerome Murdough, first attracted police attention because of Commissioner Bratton's obsession with "broken windows" policing. Mr. Murdough's only crime was that he was homeless, and when police took him into custody, he had been huddling in the stairwell of a New York City public housing development, seeking warmth from the frigid, polar-express winter experienced by the Northeast. The frail, the poor, people in crisis, and people of color are the targets of Police Commissioner Bratton's insistence on terrorizing those with the least. And all of this sadness and drama is approved by Mayor de Blasio, a blatant contradiction to his campaign promises to reform the NYPD. The calls for NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton to be fired, or to resign, are beginning to grow. On last night's edition of NY1 The Call with Emmy Award-winning journalist John Schiumo, the nearly universal sentiment was that the NYPD were out of control. It appears that Mayor de Blasio's promises to reform the NYPD have gone unfulfilled. Thus far, though, the mainstream media has been giving Mayor de Blasio a free pass for having to failed to reform the NYPD, but already political bloggers, such as Suzannah B. Troy, and grass roots groups, like New Yorkers Against Bratton, have not let up on demanding reforms. Ms. Troy was assaulted last year in a case that the NYPD refused to investigate, Ms. Troy alleges, in order to manipulate crime statistics in New York. And New Yorkers Against Bratton has been the sole group to take a hard line position against the new mayor over his broken promises to overhaul the corrupt NYPD. Indeed, at last spring's Left Form 2014, various activists collaborated on an open forum to draw attention to how many nonprofit reform groups have deescalated calls for police reform out of deference to the new mayor. This is Commissioner Bratton's second service as head of the city's police department. He had previously served under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's first term, but resigned in 1996 amid a probe into 21 out-of-town trips he had taken and other sources of friction with former Mayor Giuliani. During his brief first stint as commissioner, NYPD were involved in the choking death of Anthony Baez, a controversy that critics of Commissioner Bratton readily point to, in demonstration of his callous disregard of police brutality and police murder. Now that two deaths of innocent people have occurred in Mayor de Blasio's young administration, political bloggers, activists, and minority communities wonder how many more deaths, incidences of police brutality on senior citizens, incidences of people of color being refused peaceful accommodation on public transportation, and military-style police raids will it take before the nonprofit "veal pen" reform groups remobilize to renew their demands for a complete overhaul of the NYPD, beginning with the Commissioner Bratton's removal from office.

RELATED Staten Island man dies after NYPD cop puts him in chokehold — SEE THE VIDEO (The New York Daily News) Homeless veteran 'basically baked to death' at Rikers Island while being held on trespassing charge (The New York Daily News) 7 million $lush fund reasons why VOCAL-NY, CPR community groups no longer pressing for NYPD reforms (Bill de Blasio Sold Out) Michael Hayes, LMT, has practiced massage for more than 20 years as a licensed massage therapist in New York City. Flatiron Massage is located in the Flatiron District of Manhattan.

When Cuomo closed the Moreland Commission, he was hoping to shut down all efforts to investigate political corruption

PUBLISHED : FRI, 18 JUL 2014, 08:27 PM
UPDATED : SUN, 20 JUL 2014, 01:45 PM

The Governor's interference with the Moreland Commission's efforting to combat corruption has prompted federal prosecutors to seek grand jury testimony in an inquiry into Gov. Andrew Cuomo's closure of the Moreland Commission Ever since the administration of Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) agreed to close the Moreland Commission as part of an unseemly budget negotiation with corrupt state lawmakers at the end of March, the sordid gossip amongst political bloggers has been whether any prosecutors would dare investigate whether allegations that Gov. Cuomo interfered with the Moreland Commission's investigations would rise to the level of obstruction of justice. When it was reported that members of the Moreland Commission were contemplating issuing subpoenas to real estate developers, including the Extell Corporation, which had made contributions to Gov. Cuomo's campaign committee account, the Cuomo administration was said to have become involved in managing those subpoenas. To the consternation of the control-obsesses Cuomo administration, the Moreland Commission was reported to have issued a subpoena to the corrupt state Democratic Party, that subpoena was later downsized and redirected under the specter of possible influence by the Cuomo administration, according to political bloggers. Finally, when the Moreland Commission dared to poke around in how the state's corrupt legislators earn outside income, that is when the state legislature brokered a backroom deal with the Cuomo administration to finally shut down the politically dangerous Moreland Commission, triggering a backlash that portrayed Gov. Cuomo as being a power-hungry megalomaniac. At one point, Gov. Cuomo publicly declared that he controlled the independent functions of the Moreland Commission in a Gollum-like "My Precious" tirade, saying, "The Moreland Commission was my commission," adding, “It’s my commission. My subpoena power, my Moreland Commission. I can appoint it, I can disband it. I appoint you, I can un-appoint you tomorrow. So, interference ? It's my commission. I can’t ‘interfere’ with it, because it is mine.” At each turn, whenever the Moreland Commission's investigations into political or campaign corruption threatened to splish-splash onto Cuomo administration officials, the governor or his staff appeared to be protecting their own political interests as they overlapped with the investigations by the Moreland Commission. Political bloggers wondered whether the Cuomo administration was trying to protect wealthy campaign contributors from the possibility of investigation or having the activities of wealthy campaign contributions come under review by Moreland Commission investigators. Actions reportedly by Cuomo administration officials or political operatives loyal to the Cuomo administration to downsize, redirect, or otherwise alter the investigative work by the Moreland Commission cast questions over the independence needed by investigative bodies, such as the Moreland Commission, conducting politically-unpopular but wholly-necessary criminal investigations into government and campaign corruption in New York state. That the Cuomo administration appeared to be heading off the possibility of investigations -- before the Moreland Commission could announce actual investigations or substantiated suspicions of wrong-doing -- created a sense of unease amongst political bloggers, because political bloggers wondered what activities were the Cuomo administration trying to conceal or hide from investigators. The culture of pay-to-play : Billionaire real estate development corporations make big money campaign donations, and then developers receive tax breaks, insider access to politicians During the period of time when the mainstream media was reporting that the Moreland Commission might investigate the culture of pay-to-play between campaign contributions made by wealthy real estate developers and the development of government policies that favored these developers, political bloggers cheered at the prospect that finally state investigators would look into corrupt real estate developers and their lobbyists. One of those lobbyists is the one-man power house, George Arzt. Mr. Arzt is a political adviser, lobbyist, spokesman, public relations consultant, and a very generous campaign contributor. Over the years, it is said that he made over $90,000 in traceable campaign contributions to various politicians in New York State. Critics of Mr. Arzt assert that Mr. Arzt buys access to top politicians with these sizable campaign contributions, and that that, plus his campaign consulting work and lobbying work, help to give his real estate developer clients an unfair advantage in gaming government policy for his clients. In this culture, where the right amount of campaign contributions, lobbying retainers, or the exchange of other funds, can give real estate developers an inside track to getting planning approvals for zone-busting real estate projects or tax breaks for billion-dollar skyscrapers, is what leads to so much corruption in government. The corrupt pay-to-play culture plays out like this : Mr. Arzt was a consultant for Extell Corporation, the developer of the billionaire luxury condo skyscraper on West 57th Street. Extell Corporation made sizable campaign contributions to Gov. Cuomo just before Gov. Cuomo signed into law multi-millions in tax breaks for Extell. All this money changing hands, and the local prosecutor for Manhattan, Cy Vance, abdicates his responsibility to investigate for bribes and corruption, leaving this matter for the Moreland Commission to investigate, except Gov. Cuomo shut the Moreland Commission down before any investigation could get off the ground. Last summer, Mr. Arzt was quoted by the mainstream media as an impartial observer during last year's mayoral race. However, political bloggers discovered that he had been part of a group of politicos having weekly meetings, strategizing how to install former New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn as Michael Bloomberg's successor. Closing the loop on Mr. Arzt is that he was a campaign manager for former Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes' doomed reelection campaign. Questions of public ethics violations and even possible embezzlement were raised when it was discovered that former D.A. Hynes had been using an official slush fund of money proceeds from seized cash from drug deals gone bad to pay for another campaign advisor, Mortimer Matz. While Mr. Arzt wasn't implicated in that campaign controversy, when D.A. Hynes used proceeds from seized criminal activities from the office accounts of the Brooklyn District Attorney's office to pay Mr. Matz millions for his consulting services, by some estimates, that left more money in D.A. Hynes campaign committee accounts to pay other campaign consultants. Besides Mr. Arzt, another consultant who worked for D.A. Hynes and was paid through D.A. Hynes' campaign committee account was the lobbying firm, The Advance Group. All corrupt legislative deals passed through Albany are marked with the same fingerprints. Whenever corrupt big business interests and their lobbyists need legislative help, the go-to-man is New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. Several sources, who were involved in the tax break for wealthy real estate developers, including Extell Corporation, told The New York Daily News that Speaker Silver was the "creator of the lucrative tax relief." Over the years, Speaker Silver has been involved in so many corruption controversies that he has learned how to survive investigations into corruption by facilitating the corruption of other politicians. In the case of the tax breaks for wealthy developers, if Speaker Silver was ever fully challenged in a criminal corruption investigation, he could possibly expose the role of Gov. Cuomo's apparent pay-to-play deal to sign the tax breaks into law in exchange for large campaign contributions from the real estate developers, which stood to benefit from the tax law amendment. Many government reform activists and political bloggers estimate that Speaker Silver has been involved in so many self-serving or insider-serving deals that, if he were fully investigated by prosecutors, a take-down of Speaker Silver could potentially implicate over three-quarters of the entire state legislature. Indeed, one outcome of the low-level prosecution of former State Senator Shirley Huntley was her revelation that she would see “bags of cash" brought into the State Senate building. From whom was all that and other money coming from ? Who, in a leadership position, having received that money, got to divide that money up ? None of these, and other activities, ever get investigated by state law enforcement, whether that be the local district attorneys, who roll up to the state attorney general, or, as witnessed by the fate of investigative corruption panels under the Cuomo administration, by the Moreland Commission. Corrupt officials and political operatives have learned to game the weak-willed district attorneys and timid attorney general. Politicians and lobbyist know that the corruption in New York state runs so deep that, collectively, the size of some investigations would involve the prosecution of significant political or government individuals, which may pose special problems for the local prosecutor, making federal prosecutors, like U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, the only hope that political bloggers and government reform activists have at overhauling the corrupt political system running local and state governments across New York. It was Mr. Bharara's office, which issued a subpoena this week, seeking grand jury testimony from the assistant to the former executive director of the now shuttered Moreland Commission. Mr. Bharara took possession of the investigation files and correspondence of the former commissioners serving on the Moreland Commission, along with other records, to try to reconstruct the activities and involvements of various elected officials, lobbyists, and other political operatives. To complete his due diligence and review of all these potential criminal investigations, Mr. Bharara's office recently recruited the help of super lawyer Daniel Stein, a former top prosecutor with years of corruption prosecution experience, giving political bloggers hope that we are about to witness a once-in-a-century renewal of government integrity.

RELATED Is Gov. Andrew Cuomo under investigation for obstruction of justice ? (The New York Times)

Speaker Mark-Viverito's campaign paid a lobbying firm, which also lobbied back at her on behalf of clients

How much corruption has to happen, before progressive activists protest against City Council, demanding reforms to end the corruptive role of money and lobbyists in New York politics ?

How many Mark-Viverito-lobbyist exposés in The New York Daily News will it take before the Mark-Viverito administration and all of her teams of lobbyists come under federal investigation ? On the heels of yesterday's blog post about campaign finance questions pertaining to New York City Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito's successful Council speakership campaign, an article in today's The New York Daily News revisits on-going questions over the role of lobbyists in the Speaker Mark-Viverito's administration of the City Council. In the first few months of this year, Speaker Mark-Viverito has been paying approximately $28,000 to the lobbying firm of Pitta Bishop Del Giorno & Giblin -- at the same time when Pitta Bishop was lobbying Speaker Mark-Viverito on behalf of the lobbying firm's clients. The lobbying firm of Pitta Bishop essentially rescued Councilmember Mark-Viverito's speakership campaign last year when it appeared that Pitta Bishop took control over Councilmember Mark-Viverito's sagging speakership campaign after she became engulfed in a series of mainstream media exposés in connection with the lobbying firm, The Advance Group, which had been managing her lobbying campaign for the Council speakership. Various political campaigns managed by The Advance Group have since become the subject of a series of recent punitive findings and fines assessed by the city's Campaign Finance Board. Nevertheless, The Advance Group remained involved in Councilmember Mark-Viverito's speakership campaign at the time until she won her lobbying campaign. Since Speaker Mark-Viverito became indebted to her lobbyists, government reform activists question how could municipal ethics and campaign finance regulatory authorities condone her close relationship with these lobbyists. Not only can lobbyists close to the new Council speaker leverage her political indebtedness, but some of these same lobbying firms have also played a role in determining secondary and tertiary City Council leadership assignments, extending the control that lobbyists exert over the municipal legislative body. If you look the media, the City Hall press corps keeps looking the other way when it comes to concerns about illegality. "Simultaneously paying and being lobbied by the same firm is legal, but the practice has been criticized by good-government groups worried that such a cozy relationship can give lobbyists special access to a politician," reported The New York Daily News. For years, government reform activists have complained that the culture of corruption in government is allowed to get worse under the enabling eyes of do-nothing regulators, do-less good government groups, and non-plussed mainstream media reporters, who claim that some forms of government and campaign corruption are "perfectly legal." The situational ethics of political hacks acting in regulatory capacities is what undermines the public's confidence in government and in elected officials, but yet for every scandalous conflict of interest between elected officials, like Council Speaker Mark-Viverito, and lobbyists, like those at the firm of Pitta Bishop, is that good government groups and government reform activists rarely propose reforms that effectively render illegal the corruptive role of money and lobbyists in government. In the time leading up to the City Council vote to determine the next Council speaker, some political bloggers suggested a suite of proposed reforms to overhaul the role of lobbyists in determining leadership posts in the City Council. Some of those reforms, first published on November 24, 2013, in a YouTube video, included : reform the do-nothing Campaign Finance Board ; pressure progressives to enforce transparency ; improve Speakership electioneering reporting ; end subcontractor loopholes ; and end the provision of free campaign services, including for the Speakership. These recommendations, in addition to revoking the cloaking rule that allows lobbyists to avoid disclosure when they lobby the City Council for leadership or administrative appointments and banning campaign consultants who receive payments from the Campaign Finance Board's matching dollar program from acting as municipal lobbyists, can strengthen voter confidence in the integrity of government and in elected officials. Other reforms can be suggested by voters, government reform activists, and by good government groups. But the media neither invites voters to make recommendations for reforms, nor does the media launch government reform campaigns to support the recommendations of government reform activists working to overhaul this broken political system.

RELATED City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito paid $28G to lobbying firm for consulting, while they lobbied her on behalf of clients (The New York Daily News) Media reports show that Melissa Mark-Viverito evaded campaign finance caps by opening second account to fund Council speaker race (NYC : News & Analysis) More questions about Melissa Mark-Viverito's campaign finances and her lobbyists (NYC : News & Analysis)

Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito evaded campaign finance caps by opening second account to fund Council speaker race

City and state campaign finance regulatory authorities look the other way, as New York Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito uses a campaign committee account set up for a sham 2017 campaign to pay over $100,000 for her 2013 Council speaker race.

Not even former Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who was accused of being each of shady, unethical, and a political boss in the old-fashioned corrupt sense by many New York political bloggers, ever dared to be this blatantly egregious Updated information about campaign committee fundraising and expenditures were made this week by elected officials serving in New York State to the state's campaign finance regulatory authority, the New York State Board of Elections. The filing by New York Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito showed some activity since her January filing, but the latest disclosures of her 2017 campaign committee still showed no expenditures to pay for the lobbying services provided to Councilmember Mark-Viverito's successful speakership campaign that began in earnest following her successful reelection to the City Council. It was publicly reported that The Advance Group was providing lobbying services to Councilmember Mark-Viverito's speakership campaign. Those services were described as being provided for free, even though municipal campaign finance regulations require that in-kind contributions be declared. The Council speakership is a leadership post of the city's legislative body that is secondary to the leader's Council seat. The speakership is served concurrently for the term of the leadership post with the elected official's service of the underlying Council seat. Council Speaker Mark-Viverito's use of The Advance Group triggered extensive media scrutiny, notably by political bloggers and several mainstream media outlets. Further criticism were made when it was shown that many of the political operatives, who worked on Councilmember Mark-Viverito's successful speakership campaign were later given high-ranking patronage jobs with the City Council. Other lobbyists were reported to have been helping Speaker Mark-Viverito determine the assignments of secondary and tertiary leadership posts at the City Council. Candidates, who run for the City Council and who participate in the matching contribution program of the city's campaign finance regulatory authority, the Campaign Finance Board, as was the case with Councilmember Mark-Viverito, are subject to fundraising caps and spending limits. However, Councilmember Mark-Viverito opened a second campaign committee account with the state's campaign finance regulatory authority, and her campaign committee designated that second account for the 2017 election cycle. If the state Board of Elections had done its due diligence, it would have relatively easily discovered that Councilmember Mark-Viverito had just participated in the Campaign Finance Board's matching campaign contribution program, and that the leadership post she was very publicly seeking would be won through a lobbying campaign of her fellow City Councilmembers, who vote to select the Council speaker, rendering that second state campaign committee account to be a vehicle to fund the leadership post that would be served concurrently with her elected office. Until now, nobody knows the rationale for why the state's Board of Election continues to approve the fundraising and expenditures through Council Speaker Mark-Viverito's sham 2017 campaign committee account, when that account has been and is being used for a leadership post with dual mandate implications. A dual mandate is a controversial loophole that allows a person to serve more than one elected office at the same time, meaning, that an elected official would have competing interests as the office holder carries out his or her duties to the public. An elected official serving a dual mandate would be beholden to teams of lobbyists, campaign consultants, and big money donors that would trash the spirit of campaign finance laws and would open the door to appearances of conflicts of interest, steering patronage jobs to political operatives, allowing lobbyists a greater say over government business, and other questionable dealings. There is no known municipal precedent for dual campaign committee accounts to be authorized for the concurrent service of a publicly elected municipal office and a municipal leadership post that is secondary to the elected office. Furthermore, no other City Councilmember was allowed the unfair advantage of staying within the fundraising and expenditure caps of the Campaign Finance Board and still circumvent those caps with a state Board of Elections campaign committee account that is subject to no restrictions. When contacted last March, representatives of the state Board of Elections turned down a Freedom of Information Law request for the rationale for approving Councilmember Mark-Viverito's second campaign committee account, and, after negotiation, agreed to provide the account opening documents for her sham 2017 campaign committee.

RELATED Melissa Mark-Viverito spent big bucks on speaker's race, campaign filings show (The New York Daily News) Council speaker puts connected lobbyist on payroll (Crain's New York Business) Lobbyists aid Mark-Viverito transition (Crain's New York Business)

de Blasio's lobbying group, the Campaign for One New York, finally drawing heavier scrutiny from mainstream media

Was the mayor's ''nonprofit'' lobbying group, the Campaign for One New York, designed to be the political arm of City Hall, even before the new mayor was sworn in ?

501(c)(4) Nonprofit Group That Appears To Be Coordinating Political Activities For de Blasio Spent $1.7 Million In First Half Of 2014 The lobbying group formerly known as UPKNYC, largely responsible for pushing the mayor's policy of expanding pre-kinder to more New Yorkers (but which notably stopped short of being truly universal), transformed itself into a blank-check nonprofit group that now serves as the political arm of City Hall. The group, rebranded as the Campaign for One New York, has raised nearly $2 million to coordinate political activities outside City Hall in advancing Mayor Bill de Blasio's political agenda. Within six or seven weeks into Mayor de Blasio's new administration, the press began to raise questions about the shift of lobbyists and political operatives from the mayor's former campaign to the new nonprofit group. Shortly thereafter, political bloggers noticed the pattern of cycling political activities through various structures, which are sometimes just sufficiently distant from the new mayor -- and sometimes not. The nonprofit group was organized in December, even before the new mayor was sworn in, in anticipation of needing a well-funded astroturf group to keep activists and lobbyists alike occupied with the mayor's agenda. Some good government groups raise questions about government ethics in how the mayor fundraises for his political nonprofit. For example, the pro-business publication, Crain's New York Business, published a report showing that before the mayor signed a favorable labor contract with the municipal teachers' union, the national teachers' union made a sizable contribution to the mayor's political nonprofit. Is the mayor selling official acts in exchange for political donations to the Campaign for New York ? At least two of the largest donors to the Campaign for One New York were donors to the Anybody But Quinn effort last year, which acted to help elect Mayor de Blasio by defeating former Council Speaker Christine Quinn's mayoral campaign. Those donors were the businesswoman Wendy Neu and the union UNITE HERE!, according to an analysis of donation records performed by The New York Times. The union UNITE HERE! was once led by Mayor de Blasio's cousin, John Wilhelm. A third donor, Edison Properties, was formerly headed by Steve Nislick, who founded the animal rights group NY-CLASS, another nonprofit that was behind the Super PAC that, unbeknownst to voters, was acting to help elect Mayor de Blasio. The Super PAC was advised by the lobbying firm, The Advance Group. The same pattern of lobbyists and donors showing up over and over again across different 501(c)(4) groups and Super PAC's raises the question at to whether political activities are being coordinated between the mayor's supporters. Political operatives at 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East funneled $250,000 in contributions to the mayor's lobbying group, even though the mayor turned his back on his campaign promise to save LICH. One of the most controversial interactions between the mayor's lobbying group and New York voters has been the role of Long Island College Hospital, or LICH, as the Brooklyn hospital was known. The mayor appealed to voters to elect him as mayor after he made a series of campaign promises that would, in effect, turn the page to the 1% enabling Bloomberg-Quinn administration. In his promises to break with the Bloomberg-Quinn policies, then candidate de Blasio promised to fight for "hospitals, not condos" and he pledged to end the stop-and-frisk era. The role of lobbyists connected to the Campaign for One New York figure prominently in how the mayor has betrayed those promises central to his successful mayoral campaign. Political operatives from the large healthcare union, 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, drove the union to contribute $250,000 to the nonprofit acting as the mayor's political arm even as the mayor was turning his back on the slow-motion shuttering of LICH. Helping to deflect the mayor's refusal to save LICH were operatives from the lobbying firm, Berlin Rosen. The PR spin doctor Dan Levitan handles issues for Mayor de Blasio where Berlin Rosen must score political points in the face of de Blasio administration failures, and Mr. Levitan was tasked with justifying the mayor's refusal to save LICH. The work Mr. Levitan did included overseeing the mailing of controversial printed literature that praised Mayor de Blasio. The closure of LICH has triggered a resounding backlash in Brooklyn, the supposed center of Mayor de Blasio's political support, proving that the Campaign for One New York isn't necessarily doing advocacy work to benefit the community so much as it's also doing damage control as the mayor sells out to big money real estate developers, as the case with the LICH closure has proved. Berlin Rosen operative Dan Levitan sends deceptive mailers to Brooklyn residents, justifying the mayor's betrayal of the campaign promise to save Long Island College Hospital. He is also the spokesman for the police reform umbrella group, Communities United for Police Reform. Besides confusing voters to deflect blame away from Mayor de Blasio, Mr. Levitan also oversees communication from the largest umbrella group of police reform organizations in New York City, Communities United for Police Reform, or CPR, as the umbrella group is known. Mr. Levitan stops-and-frisks all reform communication from these groups to subjugate the community's demands for police reform to the mayor's need to appease Big Businesses, who demand that Police Commissioner Bill Bratton enforce a "broken windows theory" of policing, to jail the poor, people of color, and other troublesome minorities as part of real estate developers' campaign to further gentrify New York City to support higher and higher, forever escalating real estate prices. Even though the mayor campaigned on a promise to end policing tactics that unconstitutionally targeted minorities, the mayor installs lobbyists and de Blasiobots to block reforms, turning a deaf ear to demands from minority communities that the New York Police Department be reformed. The mayor's lobbyists, campaign consultants, and Big Money donors turn to 501(c)(3) charity groups, 501(c)(4) nonprofit groups, Super PAC's, campaign committee accounts, and possibly even political party committee accounts to fund coordinated political activities. A few weeks ago, the mayor's close political ally, Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, authorized the distribution of about $50 million in taxpayer monies to some of the city's largest charity groups. For years, these budget allocations have been being made under allegations of political favoritism, and this year was no different. Politically-connected groups, like the Hispanic Federation, received outsized distributions from the speaker's slush fund. The Hispanic Federation is a project of a political insider, who has worked as a chief campaign consultant to the Council speaker, according to NPQ, the journal of the Nonprofit Information Networking Association. City grants to the Hispanic Federation comprise over 30 per cent. of the annual budget of the nonprofit, according to some statistics, and the Hispanic Federation pays the Council speaker's campaign consultant for his lobbying work out of its annual budget. Having lobbyists get paid through a pass-through entity helps keep politically-motivated budget allocations funneling in a circuitous pattern. When the de Blasio-Mark-Viverito administration isn't funneling money to politically-connected 501(c)(3) groups, like the Hispanic Federation, they use 501(c)(4) groups, like the Campaign For One New York, to coordinate their political activities, or funding for CPR member groups to block police reforms. As a fallback, the mayor opened his 2017 reelection campaign committee account just weeks into his first mayoral term. Campaign committee accounts are subject to caps and higher scrutiny ; therefore, the most minimal but most visible expenses get charged back to campaign committee accounts. For example, approximately $10,000 that Mr. de Blasio spent on the annual Inner Circle charity show was charged back to his reelection campaign committee account, The Wall Street Journal reported. For her part, Council Speaker Mark-Viverito updated her own 2017 campaign committee account, a phantom account for which nobody knows its true purpose, since the Council speaker is term limited in the City Council, and she has said that she will not run for mayor against her political patron. Her updated filing with the state's campaign finance regulatory authority, the state Board of Elections, still shows no expenditure to The Advance Group, in spite of its pivotal role in selecting Councilmember Mark-Viverito as this year's new Council speaker. No word yet on whether any party committee accounts of the Democratic Party or the Working Families Party have had to make any disclosures of politically-motivated expenditures that tie back to the coordinated political activities of the de Blasio-Mark-Viverito administration.

RELATED Campaign For One New York Lobbying Group Adopts de Blasio’s Agenda (The New York Times) Lobbying Group Aiding de Blasio Spent $1.7 Million in First Half of 2014 (The New York Times) Alarm raised about ‘‘dark money’’ behind de Blasio’s LICH - Fortis letter (The Brooklyn Daily Eagle) The Campaign for One New York has received a total of $1.7 million in less than seven months - and about three-quarters of that, $1.2 million, came from just five donors (The New York Daily News) Campaign for One New York Raised Nearly $1.8 Million to Coordinate Political Activities In Support of de Blasio's Agenda (The Wall Street Journal)

Before Departure, Turbulence Greets Mayor's Italian Vacation

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio's summer vacation to Italy has triggered an avalanche of skepticism and resentment from the media and from New Yorkers sympathetic with each of LIRR union workers and commuters, who ride the LIRR. If the pace of the disappointment keeps up on social media, the mayor's advisors may force him to postpone or to even cancel his Italian vacation.

De Blasio demurs on LIRR strike impact on Italy trip http://t.co/Xtt9Cvld6F via @capitalnewyork

— Dana Rubinstein (@danarubinstein) July 14, 2014

De Blasio says he won't cut his vacation short in the event of an LIRR strike http://t.co/Q6077dYhu1

— Newsday (@Newsday) July 14, 2014

.@BilldeBlasio would not commit to cutting short his vacation if @LIRR workers strike, @SallyGold reports http://t.co/epdhtRVELd

— Capital New York (@capitalnewyork) July 14, 2014

Bill de Blasio Won’t Commit to Cutting Italy Trip Short if There’s an LIRR Strike http://t.co/GMNROzY3vt

— Politicker (@Politicker) July 14, 2014

De Blasio: LIRR strike may not derail my European vacation http://t.co/hBodIRDX79

— Joel Siegel (@joelmsiegel) July 14, 2014

De Blasio not ruling out Italy trip during possible LIRR strike http://t.co/73ABHvvOL2

— WSJ Greater New York (@WSJNY) July 14, 2014

... And de Blasio says it's unlikely he'll change plans to go on vacation even if the LIRR strikes http://t.co/FPrh99cP13

— amNewYork (@amNewYork) July 14, 2014

Mayor De Blasio Keeps Vacation Plans As Possible LIRR Strike Looms - http://t.co/U9Kk9wURPY

— David Schantz (@DavidSchantz) July 14, 2014

De Blasio won't say if LIRR strike would impact his Italy vacation http://t.co/wlzL4njGNU via @capitalnewyork @SallyGold

— Dan Goldberg (@DanGoldbergCNY) July 14, 2014

"It's a technicality." —Bill de Blasio on a provision in the City Charter http://t.co/xLdP5rDP1h

— Conor Skelding (@conorskelding) July 14, 2014

Will it really? http://t.co/MkoGkiudRt

— Courtney Williams (@CourtFWilliams) July 15, 2014

At the Board of Elections, Council speaker's political machinations threaten to undermine ballot petitioning

Ousting the president of the city's Board of Elections was supposed to give City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito "power and control of a host of patronage jobs," but the succession process has been turned ndsıpǝ poʍu

"It's in the Council's hands." New York City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito was all set to expand her power, influence, and control over patronage jobs that govern the corrupt ballot counting for New York City elections. Except that the president of the Board of Elections, whom she had threatened to replace, got up and quit on her. Last Friday, Board of Elections President Gregory Soumas resigned his post. With President Soumas' sudden departure, Speaker Mark-Viverito may lose the upperhand she had been coveting in choosing his replacement. Since Manhattan Democratic Chairman Keith Wright had failed to reappoint Mr. Soumas for another term as president of the Board of Elections, the City Council, headed by Speaker Mark-Viverito, was salivating at the opportunity to seize control of the appointment process. But President Soumas' resignation may allow the Manhattan Democratic chair to appoint a replacement. Speaker Mark-Viverito's power grab over the Board of Elections is reminiscent of Gov. Andrew Cuomo's egocentric reasoning for disbanding the Moreland Commission : “It’s my commission. My subpoena power, my Moreland Commission. I can appoint it, I can disband it. I appoint you, I can un-appoint you tomorrow. So, interference? It’s my commission. I can’t 'interfere' with it, because it is mine. It is controlled by me.” Generally, appointments of the commissioner, who serves as president of the Board of Elections, comes with corrupt spoils and privileges. A commissioner on the Board of Elections, especially the Board's president, can establish election policy and make politically-motivated hires for the scores of patronage jobs controlled by commissioners. Often, those politically-motivated hires are made in concert with the politicians or political operatives, who appointed the commissioners, The New York Daily News reported. While the Council speaker and the Manhattan Democratic chair fight over control over President Soumas' successor, the broken political system is ignoring the threat of confusion that now threatens to spread to the ballot petitioning being undertaken now by political candidates running for office this year. The Board of Elections reviews balloting petitions for accuracy and completeness, and on top of the mixed-motivations that govern who gets appointed as commissioners of the Board of Elections, those political machinations are compounded by the way some political operatives scheme to challenge balloting petitions, a process ultimately overseen by the Board of Elections' commissioners -- and its president.

RELATED Melissa Mark-Viverito may replace Board of Elections head with her own pick (The New York Daily News) Melissa Mark-Viverito on elections board prez's future: "It's in the Council's hands." (The New York Daily News) NYC Board of Elections President Gregory Soumas quits ahead of possible ouster in City Council Speaker power play (The New York Daily News)