Photo credit: abcnews.go.com
Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has been ordered to pay a substantial fine of $475,000 due to the improper use of public funds associated with a police security detail during his unsuccessful presidential campaign. This ruling came from a judge who deemed de Blasio’s legal challenge, which sought to overturn the fine, as “perplexing” and lacking any substantive basis.
The ruling effectively upholds the finding of the city’s ethics board, which had previously imposed the fine in 2023. De Blasio’s defense argued that the guidance he received regarding the use of public funds for his security was unclear, and claimed that the ethics board exceeded its jurisdiction in handing down the penalty.
Judge Shahabuddeen Ally authored a comprehensive 80-page decision that dismissed de Blasio’s claims. The judge noted that de Blasio was clearly informed that costs associated with security for his cross-country campaign would not be covered by the city. Despite this, the mayor chose to employ a police detail for his campaign activities.
“(His) position essentially eliminates his own agency in the choices he made,” the judge remarked, labeling the assertion that he was exempt from the city’s conflicts-of-interest regulations as lacking in merit.
This ruling holds de Blasio accountable for approximately $320,000 in travel expenses related to his security detail during the four-month election campaign, which he launched in 2019 while still in office. Additionally, he faces a fine of $155,000 for 31 out-of-state trips taken by the security detail, with a penalty of $5,000 for each trip.
The fine represents the most significant penalty ever levied by New York’s Conflicts of Interest Board, which is responsible for ensuring that local officials adhere to ethical guidelines.
Carolyn Lisa Miller, executive director of the ethics board, indicated that the judge’s ruling clearly supports the board’s actions. Meanwhile, de Blasio’s attorney, Andrew G. Celli Jr., chose not to comment on the case, and de Blasio himself did not respond to attempts to reach him for a statement.
In their legal arguments, de Blasio’s representatives contended that obligating him to reimburse the security costs infringed upon his First Amendment rights and imposed an “unequal burden” on candidates with fewer financial resources compared to wealthier ones. They further claimed that reimbursing the NYPD would have negligible impact on the department’s overall budget.
Prior to this ruling, de Blasio had already faced scrutiny for alleged misappropriation of his security detail. A 2021 investigation report from the city’s Department of Investigation accused him of using the officers as a “concierge service,” employing them for personal tasks such as moving his daughter into a new apartment and transporting his son to college.
Since leaving office, de Blasio has pivoted to academia, taking on lecturer roles at several universities, including the University of Michigan, while also engaging in public speaking engagements abroad.
Source
abcnews.go.com