State Senator Kruger has finally given an accounting of how the Nov. 19th protest was funded. Jotham Sederstrom of the New York Daily News got the scoop: "I paid for it all out of my campaign fund," said Kruger, whose move forced city officials to cancel the jam-packed meeting at Coney Island Hospital.
"I bought the hats, made the signs, printed the leaflets and paid for the buses. I financed the entire thing."
It is unclear why Kruger remained quiet about this for so long. His silence only served to raise speculation that the protest may have been funded- directly or indirectly- by Thor Equities.
The Gowanus Lounge points out that "According to state campaign finance regulations, campaign committee spending has to be related to running for office or holding public office. No complaints have been filed, but any that are will be investigated."
Frankly though, it looks like Kruger may not, in fact, have been misusing his campaign committee funds. If the primary motivation behind the Nov. 19th protest was for Kruger to begin promoting himself for the 2009 election for borough president, than the use of campaign money was all too appropriate.
State Sen. Carl Kruger paid for protest to target hearing on Coney project [Daily News]
Mystery Solved: Kruger Paid for Coney Island Protest [Gowanus Lounge]
4 comments:
As was stated in the Brooklyn Eagle November 20th and again yesterday -
"Senator Carl Kruger told the Eagle last month that he paid for the busses, flyers and matching yellow hats, emblazoned with the slogan “Bloomberg’s Plan: How much? How long? Who pays?” donned by some 500 protesters, that effectively shut down the Coney Island Development Corporation’s meeting to explain the city’s rezoning plan. The Daily News reported Wednesday that Kruger spent “several thousand” dollars on the whole spectacle, paid for out of his campaign fund. His $1.6 million war chest could fund a battle for the Brooklyn borough president seat."
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=5&id=17085
its so nice when a politician (mis)uses campaign funds to disrupt a public meeting.
Its so nice that he causes a near riot in his actions.
Its so nice that he purposely busses in more people then the meeting can safely handle, which he should have known, or did know before dreaming up this stunt.
Are you stupid enough to defend his actions ??
And if your wife got hurt in a riot caused by Kruger, whose head would you be screaming for?
And in the court of public opinion, do you agree with Krugers actions??
Tell everyone where you stand, if you dare?
Bruce aka Capt_Nemo
Muscle 13- I probably should have mentioned in the post that the Eagle had already reported on Nov. 20th that “Kruger said he paid for the hats and buses out of his own funds.” (That was the same article in which he declined to identify which civic organizations were with him). However, the reason the Daily News article was such a revelation is because Kruger saying his ‘own funds’ is much vaguer than saying ‘my campaign fund,’ which brings it into a specific (and very likely inappropriate) context.
Capt_Nemo- I share your outrage that Kruger would misuse funds to intentionally disrupt and shut down a public meeting. It is slimy, no question. However, I wouldn’t go as far as to call it a “near riot.” I was there on the 19th; in the past, I’ve been present at protests that turned into (or almost turned into) riots. While there was a confused, disgruntled crowd milling around outside the hospital, and while Kruger and Recchia are certainly agitators, I think it’s unfair to claim that Kruger started a ‘near riot.’
Ben, I couldnt make it that night, but that was what was said to me, and the news headlines proclaimed the same, all i could do was go by that. I hopefully will be there for the next one
Bruce aka Capt_Nemo
Post a Comment