Former Mayor Joe Ganim says he’s opening a joint police substation/satellite campaign office at Trumbull Gardens in his comeback bid for mayor. This may get into one of those fuzzy areas whether it’s a permissible expense under Connecticut campaign finance law.
Ganim political operatives say Ganim’s not going to the bathroom these days without a lawyer considering his history, but other campaign camps, depending how they interpret the statute, could raise it as an issue.
Link to the guidebook here.
From Connecticut campaign finance law guidebook:
Permissible Expenditures Generally
All campaign expenditures by a candidate committee must be made to promote the nomination or election of the candidate who established the committee. With respect to a political slate committee, all expenditures must be made to promote the success or defeat of candidates for nomination or election to office, and for town committees, all expenditures must be made to promote the party, candidates of the party, or continuing operating costs of the party. Permissible expenses, if made for these purposes, include but are not limited to the rental of real and personal property, the purchase of computer equipment and supplies, professional services, office supplies, polling, utility costs for campaign headquarters, printing, postage, photocopying, compensation of campaign staff, travel costs of the candidate and campaign advertising of any kind.
[General Statutes § 9-607(g)]
Impermissible Expenditures Generally
No goods, services, funds or contributions received by any committee may be made available for the personal use of any candidate or individual. Expenditures for “personal use” include expenditures to defray normal living expenses for the candidate, the immediate family of the candidate, or any other individual. Expenditures for personal use are those that have no direct connection with, or effect upon, the campaign of the candidate. Examples of such expenditures include rent or mortgage payments for residential or business purposes, clothing, shoes, groceries, and personal subscriptions.
The treasurer may not under any circumstances pay the candidate or the candidate’s immediate family (spouse and dependent children residing in the candidate’s household) for services rendered to the campaign. This prohibition is not applicable to reimbursements to candidates or committee workers for goods and services purchased by them for campaign purposes.
[General Statutes § 9-607(g)]
Other improper expenditures include any expenditures by committee officers or workers which have no substantial relationship to the lawful activity of the committee. The treasurer is the only one authorized to make any committee expenditures. Further, committee funds or resources may not be used to provide an honorarium to compensate, or make a gift to, an elected public official for a speaking engagement or other service rendered on behalf of the committee unless they are for reimbursements for the elected official’s actual travel expenses to make the speech or perform the service, or for food and beverage consumed by the elected official or members of the elected official’s immediate family at the speaking engagement.
So we have Finch using taxpayer monies on his re-election bid (not legal) and Ganim using campaign funds on a police substation to boost his re-election effort (doubt this is legal either). Is that what I am seeing here? How about a mayor who thinks it’s important to spend money legally? Mary-Jane Foster, anyone?
Wicca, in your own words “Ganim using campaign funds […] to boost his reelection effort” satisfies the legal definition provided above.
“On a police substation to boost his re-election effort” were my words. BIG DIFFERENCE.
That action effectively is using a police substation to boost his re-election effort. Okay, fine. So using a campaign to finance a police substation is legal? (And capitalizing on tragedy is moral?) It’s a slippery slope, but it just may cross the line. That is assuming the Ganim campaign is using campaign funds to finance this effort.
So Hector, are you saying the money here is being used to boost his election effort OR is it to provide a working police substation.
I don’t think it is permissible to claim both.
Will the substation be there when Ganim isn’t reelected?
It’s a bunch of political bullshit. This substation will be set on fire because the denizens who hang in that area to do their business don’t want a cop shop there. Just a matter of time.
Is there a Neighborhood Watch here?
Andy, maybe you can get an arson warrant afterwards. You did claim one, right? You must have been the pride of the FD that one time. Surely there was more than one arson in Bridgeport. What happened? You should have kept everyone in town aware of your investigations and solved them all.
Ahah, the coward is heard from. You can’t read. it was two Arson Murder warrants and the rest were arrested the same day as the fire. How many capital murder arrests have you made? I don’t know if I was the pride of the FD, where you work that boy scout shit may work but not in the FD. We had a 475 solve rate and 100% conviction rate, way above the national average. BTW did you write this post while on your free coffee break?
The truth, Mayor Finch is brilliant to open a legit police substaiton in the heart of Trumbull Gardens. Policemen will be able to do paperwork, have a cup of Joe and take a dump. I think Chief Gaudett will explain the importance of a legal police department with manpower on the grounds.
Brilliant! Well played, Mayor! I certainly hope the residents feel safer having the police department on the grounds as opposed to a headquarters.
Hopefully, some peace will be returned to Trumbull Gardens. Having illegal guns and individuals who will not snitch always makes our police department work twice as hard.
Dear Lennie, The Daily Show and Real Time have Trump to fuel their routines. They got nothin’ on you, the media gods are sending you manna from Heaven.
Jennifer, you are on the money!
There is nothing in the statute that prohibits the co-existence of synergistic activities that benefit the public on the site of a campaign office.
Campaign offices are, by definition, venues that are open to the public–in the same context as retail venues/food-vending venues.
In this context, if the location happens to provide a venue for social interactions between members of the community, or a location where public servants can lawfully conduct some aspect of their duties, and the management of the establishment is amenable to such activities–and such activities don’t violate the personal-gain restrictions of the statute–then there should be no problem with a campaign office being utilized as a “makeshift” police substation.
Merchants are allowed to donate space for police substations explicitly for that purpose, but there isn’t any conflict of interest controversy in these cases. One could argue such donation of space provides opportunity for special considerations by the police in these cases, but public safety trumps such considerations (historically).
Thus, there are no explicit restrictions on using campaign offices as “police substations,” and there are contextual precedents in regard to merchants, et al., donating space for such usage.
I would like to see the community and justice system reaction to the assertion of problems with the use of a campaign office in this context. It would be interesting, indeed!
The Ganim Campaign is on safe legal, practical and ethical ground. They are stepping up to meet community needs by way of a permissible synergy. Very smart, and very indicated (ask the community!).
The other candidates obviously don’t have the wherewithal to match Ganim’s pragmatic approach in the indicated use of synergies.
Jealousy is unbecoming between candidates competing for election to political office. Give credit where it is due.
It’s not ethical, Mr. Kohut. It’s using tragedy as a springboard to capture political office. It’s politicizing tragedy for personal gain.
Ganim would do well to avoid even the perception of misconduct. That is the pragmatic approach, dear Mr. Kohut. The common voter, which is the lion’s share, are not policy wonks who spend all their spare time looking for loopholes.
For three weeks Mayor Finch has said very little about the shooting of 9 people at TG. The police department brass have not given one single update on this shooting.
Joe Ganim in a politically brilliant but totally useless gesture offered to set up his campaign headquarters and make it a police substation. Finch after three weeks of nothing is going ahead with a useless substation. WONDERFUL.
Wicca: The people of Trumbull Gardens need all the support and reassurance they can get.
You have no way of divining the true motives of Joe Ganim. The people of Trumbull don’t see things as you do, and their opinion is the only one that matters in this regard.
And Jeff Kohut needs a job.
The key word is “UNOFFICIAL.” According to Ganim’s description of the location, a branch of his campaign office, it is legal. He merely invited police officers to stop in, use a table to write reports, interview crime victims and witnesses, etc. Wild Bill Finch threatened to shut it down but it is legal under state campaign finance law.
Jeff Kohut doesn’t need and doesn’t want a job.
Bob, you shouldn’t let your own frustration lead you to say dumb-ass things so much. (And you have been on a dumb-ass roll for several years now. Especially since you’ve been off the Council.)