Conflict Is Seen In Bond Initiative Push by Kalikow
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority created a conflict of interest when he gave money to candidates who stumped for the $2.9 billion bond initiative that passed Tuesday, a former candidate for president of Manhattan plans to argue at post-election hearings next month.
Barry Popik, a Republican, said he recently learned that the MTA chairman, Peter Kalikow, made a campaign contribution on November 2 to Mr. Popik’s opponent, Scott Stringer, during a fund-raising event meant to help cover expenditures incurred during a costly Democratic primary. According to campaign filings, the contribution was $3,000.
Two days later, Mr. Popik said, a 438-word op-ed by Mr. Stringer appeared in a Manhattan weekly paper, the Downtown Express, extolling the benefits of the bond for the borough. On Sunday, Mr. Stringer campaigned heavily for the bond act.
Mr. Popik, who captured 17% of the vote to Mr. Stringer’s 76%, said the donation was “obvious influence buying.”
“It just looks wrong,” Mr. Popik said, one reason why he plans to bring up the issue at next month’s hearings before the Campaign Finance Board. “I know you don’t want to hamper free speech, but this is clearly buying influence.”
Political observers agree that such donations give the appearance of impropriety even if they are legal.
“My initial response is that this is real problematic,” a professor of political science at Baruch College, Douglas Muzzio, said. “The head of a troubled state authority gives money to candidates who will campaign on an issue that will benefit the authority? I don’t know what the legality of it is, but on its face, it doesn’t pass the smell test.”
Indeed, Mr. Kalikow, who made his fortune in real estate and has spent some of it on both Democratic and Republican candidates statewide, has done nothing illegal, state and city election officials said, because his donations were made with his own money through his company, HJ Kalikow & Company, and not with MTA funds.
In the last year and a half Mr. Kalikow has made contributions to a number of other supporters of the transportation bond, including two former mayoral candidates, Rep. Anthony Weiner and Gifford Miller, and a Democratic candidate for borough president, Eva Moskowitz. In June, his wife made a $15,000 donation to Governor Pataki, who appointed Mr. Kalikow to be MTA chairman in 2001.
Mr. Kalikow’s longtime spokesman, Marty McLaughlin, said the donation to Mr. Stringer had nothing to do with the politician’s positions but were made because Mr. Stringer is a friend of Mr. McLaughlin.
A spokesman for Mr. Stringer, Micah Lasher, said the president-elect did support the current bond as well as a failed bond proposal in 2000.
“I’m not sure what’s more laughable,” Mr. Lasher said. “Any question why Scott Stringer supported improving our transportation infrastructure or the loser who is making the accusations.”
Heads of city agencies or other city employees with substantial discretion over policy issues are not allowed to ask
anyone to donate to political candidates, but there are no restrictions prohibiting individuals from making campaign contributions as long as they do not exceed the city’s legal limit $3,850.
“You can contribute personal money on the theory you have a First Amendment right to give your own personal money to a political campaign,” the executive director of the city’s conflict of interest board, Mark Davies, said.
Although lawmakers in Albany have drafted a proposed law that is now before Mr. Pataki that would create more oversight of public authorities, the law would not address how public employees spend their money on campaigns.
Mr. Popik, who is an administrative law judge and etymologist, said he believes there should be some limitations, including lowering the amount such individuals could give to campaigns to $1,000.