A recent investigation by THE CITY has brought to light troubling allegations against the reelection campaign of Mayor Eric Adams, just weeks after a federal judge dismissed corruption charges against him.
The report reveals that the Adams campaign accepted numerous contributions from individuals who may be straw donors during May, a practice known to circumvent campaign finance laws.
This was particularly significant as these contributions were sought for the city’s public matching funds program, which offers an $8-for-$1 match on eligible donations.
Two individuals listed as donors claimed they were unemployed and never contributed to Adams or any other candidate.
Additionally, another contribution was made via a credit card linked to the donor’s employer, and various other donors provided addresses that do not appear to be their actual residences.
In light of potential retribution, THE CITY has opted to anonymize the names of these alleged donors.
These questionable donations surfaced shortly after Adams celebrated the dismissal of the federal charges against him on April 2, with the contributions occurring on May 3 and again on May 12.
In total, 17 donations amounted to $35,700, which, if considered valid by the city Campaign Finance Board (CFB), could generate an additional $32,000 from matching funds.
If Adams’ request for public matching funds is ultimately approved, his campaign may secure over $3 million in taxpayer-funded support.
All of these donations were made for the maximum allowable amount of $2,100 and were processed through credit cards.
Many of these donors, identified as individuals of modest income, reportedly do not speak English, raising concerns about their ability to navigate the online donation system, which is accessible only in English.
Most startlingly, a number of contributors were connected to Allstar Homecare Agency in Brooklyn, suggesting a potentially coordinated fundraising effort.
Adams has consistently maintained that neither he nor his campaign has knowingly accepted illegal donations.
However, the pattern of utilizing straw donors to leverage the public matching fund system has raised significant concerns.
Campaign spokesperson Todd Shapiro did not directly address questions regarding the specific donations flagged by THE CITY, but instead issued a statement emphasizing the campaign’s commitment to compliance with CFB regulations.
The previous year, Adams faced indictment for allegations related to soliciting and accepting illegal donations, with several individuals close to the mayor already having pleaded guilty to orchestrating similar straw donor schemes.
The CFB continues to investigate not only the donations associated with the indictment but also the newly identified questionable contributions from May.
In December, the board announced that preliminary reviews indicated one-third of Adams’ matching funds claims during the 2021 campaign were likely invalid, which significantly underscores the ongoing scrutiny surrounding his fundraising efforts.
Adams narrowly clinched the Democratic primary in 2021 by just over 7,000 votes, making the integrity of his fundraising all the more critical.
To date, the CFB has withheld matching funds for Adams’ 2025 campaign due to documentation concerns and the implications of the federal case and its dismissal.
Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause, described Adams’ history of submitting dubious claims for matching funds as “truly extraordinary.”
Lerner criticized the repeated pattern of unsettling fundraising practices, arguing that it raises key questions about the vetting processes within the Adams campaign.
In recent attempts to clarify these contributions, THE CITY attempted to contact several donors, many of whom expressed confusion or outright denial regarding their involvement.
Conversations with these donors revealed a troubling trend: multiple individuals claimed they did not possess the financial means to contribute such substantial sums as $2,100.
Also notable was that the billing addresses for the credit cards used for many donations did not match the residential addresses provided on contribution forms, which is a significant red flag in campaign finance regulations.
For example, a couple listed as unemployed claimed they were unaware of a $2,100 contribution, which was submitted for matching funds under their names.
Instead, they revealed their daughter had been responsible for the donation, as they were unable to navigate the donation portal themselves.
The daughter confirmed she used her credit card but expressed uncertainty regarding the origin of the request for the donation.
Further inquiries into other donors who worked at Allstar Homecare Agency revealed similar discrepancies between the credit card billing addresses and their reported residential addresses.
One Allstar worker’s contribution was flagged due to failing both address verification checks, yet it was still submitted by the Adams campaign for public matching funds.
Statements from Allstar’s management asserted that the agency adheres strictly to campaign finance laws; however, the issues surrounding employee donations continue to raise concerns.
Another donor, who claimed to work at a nearby home health firm, showed a lack of clarity about their contribution, indicating that many of those listed as donors may not have been informed or did not authorize their donations.
The frequency of these questionable contributions calls into question the campaign’s overall compliance and the effectiveness of its vetting process.
This saga of alleged illegal contributions and straw donor schemes is far from new for Eric Adams, who has faced serious allegations of using improper fundraising tactics since he launched his campaign for City Hall in 2021.
The CFB flagged numerous suspicious donations back then, but the campaign ultimately received around $10 million in matching funds despite not adequately addressing the board’s concerns.
Furthermore, indictments and guilty pleas among associates of Adams have come to light over ongoing illegal fundraising operations.
As these events have unfolded, federal authorities have intensified their scrutiny of Adams’ campaign activities, leading to the seizure of critical evidence from campaign associates and ongoing investigations into fundraising practices.
Throughout it all, Adams has maintained a narrative of ignorance regarding illicit contributions, attributing the issues to problematic aides.
Most recently, he legally challenged the CFB’s decisions to deny him matching funds after the dismissal of his federal indictment, arguing that it should no longer impact his campaign.
However, the CFB insists that its actions are justified by the campaign’s ongoing failure to respond satisfactorily to documentation requests necessitated by the allegations.
Two weeks ago, a federal judge ruled in favor of the CFB, emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability in campaign finance oversight.
The board continues to pursue documentation and communications related to dubious contributions as investigations remain active.
The chairman of Adams’ reelection campaign, Frank Carone, expressed frustration at the board’s categorization of numerous donations as “suspected straw donations,” maintaining the campaign’s adherence to compliance with finance laws.
As scrutiny of Mayor Adams’ fundraising efforts intensifies, the campaign remains at a crossroads, as questions loom over the integrity of contributions and the potential implications for his reelection bid.
image source from：thecity
