NEW YORK – New York Mayor Eric Adams declined to answer some of the most pressing questions about his 2021 campaign in a new filing, leaving local election auditors in the dark about suspected straw donations, which paid for more than 150 fundraisers and who that was exactly. collect contributions on behalf of the mayor.
The omissions add to the intrigue surrounding Adams’ first campaign for mayor, which plays a key role in the federal indictment against him accusing him of bribery involving the Turkish government. Adams has pleaded not guilty to these charges and is running for re-election in 2025.
The New York City Campaign Finance Board reviews each campaign’s paperwork to identify the inevitable accounting discrepancies, missed deadlines and other violations of campaign finance law. In May, it released a draft audit of Adams’ 2021 election efforts. On Nov. 29, the Adams campaign sent its response, which was obtained by POLITICO on Tuesday through a Freedom of Information Act request.
The board will now carry out a final inspection, which could lead to fines. And while the campaign answered the lion’s share of the board’s questions, some of the most pressing issues remained unresolved.
In its draft audit, for example, the board identified more than 50 potential straw donors – that is, people whose contributions were paid by someone else. Straw donations are often used to exceed contribution limits or to conceal the true source of the money. That’s why they are banned in New York elections.
In its audit, the board recommended waiving the straw contributions. But in the response document obtained by POLITICO, the campaign made no mention of the potentially illegal donations.
The board also identified nearly 60 groups of donations that it suspected were bundled by an intermediary on behalf of the campaign. The groups of donations were usually given on the same day by people who worked for the same employer.
Identifying the suspected bundlers, as the administration requires, would provide more insight into who favored Adams during his 2021 run. However, the mayor’s campaign attorney, Vito Pitta, did not name the suspected middlemen in his Nov. 29 response .
The board declined to comment. And Pitta did not respond to a request for comment, although the campaign has said in the past that there are no secret bundles.
Even alleged campaign fundraisers have presented Team Adams with a problem.
The board identified 158 fundraisers that the campaign said it had paid for, but did not provide receipts of expenditure to prove their claim. Without that documentation, these expenses would be considered contributions in kind.
That would pose a major problem for the campaign, as many of the in-kind contributions identified by the board came from prohibited sources, such as corporations.
The board released the draft audit report for Adams’ campaign on May 31, and Adams’ response was initially due July 1. The campaign was granted several extensions as Pitta argued they needed more time to respond to the voluminous report, but the board set a final hard deadline of November 29, with the campaign facing fines if the date is missed.
The campaign could face a fine of more than half a million dollars pending the board’s final audit, The New York Times reported. However, the actual total could be much lower if the board finds that the campaign has addressed certain issues raised in the draft audit.
It was not immediately clear when the board would release its final audit, or whether it would do so before the June 2025 Democratic primary, in which Adams plans to seek re-election.
