City Council Hopefuls Sue On Members' Money Edge; Decry CFB Ruling

Three candidates seeking to unseat City Council incumbents filed suit Dec. 2 against the Campaign Finance Board, alleging that it allowed Council Members who had been running for another office prior to the term limits extension an unfair monetary advantage.

The Chief-Leader/Adrienne Haywood-James A 'LOPSIDED' DECISION: City Council candidate Yetta Kurland (center) explains why a Campaign Finance Board ruling in the wake of the term-limit extension unfairly favors incumbents over challengers. Joining her are plaintiffs in the lawsuit, from left, Dan Jacoby, Mel Gagarin and Jo Anne Simon, and attorney Leo Glickman.

The board ruled on Nov. 3 after Mayor Bloomberg signed the term-limit extension into law that Council Members who had raised and spent money on campaigns for higher office would not have to return it even though many of them, including Speaker Christine Quinn, had decided to instead run for third terms.

'Unlevels Playing Field'

Leo Glickman, the attorney for the plaintiffs, said during a City Hall press conference Dec. 2 that because the ruling allowed incumbents to bring their spending count to zero while keeping spending limits in place for challengers, the ruling "effectively suspends the parts of the law that help level the playing field between well-financed candidates and those that abide by the limits."

The suit, filed in Manhattan Supreme Court, alleged that the CFB's decision ran contrary to existing campaign finance laws. It highlighted one of the challengers, Mel Gagarin, who is seeking to unseat Queens Councilwoman Melinda Katz. Ms. Katz reported this summer that she spent $775,000 for her planned City Comptroller campaign, while Mr. Gagarin will only be able to spend $43,000 to run against her in the Council race.

"That just on its face doesn't sound fair," said Yetta Kurland, a plaintiff who is seeking to unseat Speaker Quinn.

The third plaintiff in the case is Jo Anne Simon, who is challenging Brooklyn Councilman David Yassky.

Wants Voluntary Limits

CFB Executive Director Amy Loprest said in a statement, "The board feels the best way to provide for competitive races in these districts is to offer an incentive for the incumbents to set aside the war chest they've raised, join the Campaign Finance Program and voluntarily limit their spending for their re-election campaign to Council. If these incumbents choose to opt out of the program, they face no limits on their spending. By allowing them a fresh start, the board hopes to impact their behavior going forward and allow these elections to unfold on a more-level playing field."

Dan Jacoby, a plaintiff in the case who is not running for public office, rejected the notion that Council Members needed the ruling because they had used time and money that could have been allotted for a Council campaign when it was not legal to run for a third term.

He reasoned that running for other offices raised their profiles in such a way that it benefitted their bids for re-election. "You can bet they all started in their districts because that's their base," Mr. Jacoby said. "The fact that they've already raised all this money proves that they can. They're going to have no problem raising all the money they need."