Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
Q&A
New CFB policy on suspected intermediaries and matching funds withholding
2:47:31
·
130 sec
Council Member Lincoln Restler inquires about the Campaign Finance Board's new policy requiring a response to suspected intermediary reports and withholding matching funds for unreported intermediaries. Executive Director Paul Seamus Ryan provides information on the policy's implementation and impact.
- 587 invalid matching claims have been made due to failure to respond to suspected intermediary reports, representing about 3% of all invalid claims in the 2025 election cycle.
- The policy will remain in effect, with some timing changes due to upcoming four-day turnarounds for payment dates.
- Statement reviews carry over from one disclosure filing to the next, ensuring that unresolved issues are addressed.
Lincoln Restler
2:47:31
And I'll I'll just do a couple topics now and then shift it to colleagues and and come back for more if time allows.
2:47:40
Just wanna start with intermediaries.
2:47:43
Earlier this cycle, the CFB implemented a new policy requiring a response to suspected intermediary reports and withholding of matching funds if donations are suspected to be linked to an intermediary that goes unreported.
2:47:59
How many campaigns have had suspected intermediaries flagged so far and how many have actually responded to your request for more information?
Paul Seamus Ryan
2:48:09
I don't have the number of campaigns that have had suspected intermediaries flagged.
2:48:14
I do have the number of matching funds claims that have been denied as a result of failure to respond to our suspected intermediary reports.
2:48:22
Since this policy change there have been five eighty seven invalid matching claims codes attached to specific contributions that were claimed for match.
2:48:31
So that represents about 3% of all invalid matching claims so far in the twenty twenty five election cycle.
2:48:38
So it's a pretty small percentage but we are tracking the implementation of the new policy and it is having an impact.
2:48:46
We're seeing a significant number of matching funds claims denied as a result of failure to respond to our requests for information about suspected intermediaries.
Lincoln Restler
2:48:56
That's good to hear.
2:48:57
My understanding is the CFB is only withholding funds if there's no response after statement review of disclosure report eight, which was due in April.
2:49:06
Is that right?
Paul Seamus Ryan
2:49:07
The policy will remain in effect.
2:49:10
We will not be matching claims for which they don't respond to a suspected intermediary.
2:49:16
The timing is going to change a little bit with the four day turnarounds that are coming up for the next two payment dates.
2:49:23
The end result the question is
Lincoln Restler
2:49:24
why not go back earlier?
2:49:26
Why start in April?
Paul Seamus Ryan
2:49:27
Oh, went go back doesn't look back
Christopher Leon Johnson
2:49:30
to the
Paul Seamus Ryan
2:49:30
beginning of the election cycle yet.
2:49:31
Good.
2:49:31
Because the statement reviews carry over from one to the other.
2:49:34
Anything that's unresolved in a statement review in one disclosure filing stays on that statement review for future disclosure filings.