Bloomberg Defends Nonprofit-Vetting Process

At his press conference in midtown yesterday Michael Bloomberg was asked why one city agency approved a funding application for the Donna Reid Fund after the same group had been denied funding by another agency.

The mayor defended what had happened and added, "In fact, the process worked."


Two employees of Councilman Kendall Stewart have now been accused of skimming money off the grants the nonprofit received.

UPDATE: Councilman David Yassky’s office released a letter this morning in support of the actions of the first agency to see an application from the Donna Reid Foundation–the Department for the Aging–expressing support and commending the agency for taking the right course of action. In recent days, D.F.T.A. has been blamed for not doing more to expose inconsistencies in the nonprofit’s application.

Here’s the letter:

Hon. Edwin Mendéz-Santiago


Commissioner, New York City Department for the Aging

2 Lafayette Street

New York, NY 10007

April 18, 2008

Dear Commissioner Mendéz-Santiago:

I wish to commend the Department for the Aging for discovering and bringing to light the recent fraud perpetrated on New York City taxpayers.

All of us in City government have been shocked and outraged to learn of the flagrant misuse of public funds that led to Wednesday’s indictment of two City Council staff members. This shameful episode has underscored the need for increased transparency in the budget process at a time when the current system has clearly failed us.

According to newspaper reports, it was your department that first recognized the alleged inappropriate allocation of funds to the now debunked Donna Reid Foundation and reported it to the Department of Investigation. In doing so, you and your staff performed a critically important service for all New Yorkers.

I commend your actions, and I hope that all employees involved in uncovering this indefensible scam will be appropriately commended for their efforts. Thank you for your diligence.



David Yassky

Article continues below
More from Politics
STAR OF DAVID OR 'PLAIN STAR'?   If you thought "CP Time" was impolitic, on July 2 Donald Trump posted a picture on Twitter of a Star of David on top of a pile of cash next to Hillary Clinton's face. You'd think after the aforementioned crime stats incident (or after engaging a user called "@WhiteGenocideTM," or blasting out a quote from Benito Mussolini, or...) Trump would have learned to wait a full 15 seconds before hitting the "Tweet" button. But not only was the gaffe itself bad, the attempts at damage control made the BP oil spill response look a virtuoso performance.  About two hours after the image went up on Trump's account, somebody took it down and replaced it with a similar picture that swapped the hexagram with a circle (bearing the same legend "Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!"!). Believe it or not, it actually got worse from there. As reports arose that the first image had originated on a white supremacist message board, Trump insisted that the shape was a "sheriff's star," or "plain star," not a Star of David. And he continued to sulk about the coverage online and in public for days afterward, even when the media was clearly ready to move on. This refusal to just let some bad press go would haunt him later on.
Donald Trump More Or Less Says He’ll Keep On Tweeting as President