In a June 2013 Westview column entitled Rebellion in Village Independent Democrats (VID) Arthur Z. Schwartz writes the following: “Next fight? Stopping Hoffmann from illegally moving $20,000 of VID’s money into Geballe’s campaign account.” Let me state unequivocally that I never have, nor ever will, try to move $20,000, legally or illegally, from VID’s club account to VID’s campaign account. This is a total fabrication crafted by Arthur Schwartz. This falls into the same category of over the top emotional excess that Arthur displayed when he yelled McCarthyism when he was confronted with his support for legislation that would allow for luxury towers in the Hudson River Park. The law is very specific about campaign expenditures. The maximum donation an individual, or organization, is allowed to make, or spend on a candidate’s behalf, is $.05 per registered Democrat in the district he or she is running. In the 66th Assembly District, Part A, this amounts to approximately $1,500 per District Leader candidate. I will follow the law.
Since Arthur wants to discuss campaign ethics I have a question for him. Each month Arthur has a column and a half page campaign ad in Westview. The ad masquerades as an advertisement for his law firm. Half of this campaign ad contains a picture of Arthur and the other half lists his accomplishments in the 66th Assembly District Part A (Greenwich Village). My question to Arthur is are you going to report your campaign ad in your campaign filings or are you going to maintain the charade that it is a business expense? If you are going to maintain the charade that this is a business ad/expense are you going to deduct this expense from your taxes and ask the government, and therefore the taxpayers, to subsidize your campaign? That would be unethical even though you may have found a legal loophole to slide through. I hope that Arthur Schwartz will follow the letter as well as the spirit of the law.
Village Independent Democrats