Money in the 2013 Greenburgh Supervisor Primary Race - so far

Paul Feiner’s name recognition, personal popularity, and financial resources have made him a formidable candidate for more than two decades.    Campaign finance disclosure reports available online at www.elections.ny.gov stretching back to 2006 show that Feiner’s campaign has consistently held between $100,000 and $150,000 in campaign funds in reserve over the past 7 years.   Beyond the other advantages of incumbency, the Feiner campaign war chest is an imposing deterrent to any potential challenger, who would immediately start the brief campaign season at a six figure financial disadvantage.  Although Feiner has gradually increased his monthly spending commitments in recent non-election years, the dearth of competitive elections combined with steady, low –level fundraising in off-election years, has allowed Feiner to steadily grow his war chest while also strategically distributing funds to local political and charitable organizations, further building loyalty bonds with Greenburgh voters.  Whether or not Feiner has intentionally set $100,000 as the minimum level for his campaign account, retaining this amount of campaign funds in reserve has proven an intelligent choice as evidenced by the 2007 campaign when Feiner expended $110,000 during the election season - outspending his opponent and his own fundraising efforts by $40,000.  Still, Feiner ended the expensive 2007 primary season with over $90,000 in the bank in contrast with his opponent who apparently ended her campaign with $40,000 of debt.   It is one thing to be electorally humiliated by Feiner, but it is quite something else to also suffer financially for that dubious privilege.  

So what is going on with money in the 2013?  It was unclear until the May 21 Greenburgh Democratic Party convention whether Feiner would be challenged in the Sept. 10^th Democratic primary for the position of Town Supervisor.    Feiner may not have expected any challenge as he did relatively little fundraising early in 2013, raising only $300.  This lackadaisical early effort must also have arisen from the comfort that, at the time of the convention, Feiner’s campaign held $132,977 in funds.  With the announcement of Bernstein’s nomination, Feiner immediately ramped up his fundraising.   Between May 21^st and July 2^nd, he raised $12,570, including from 40 donors who gave at least $100 each.   After this initial burst of activity, however, Feiner’s fundraising quickly and surprisingly plummeted.   In the eight weeks between July 2^nd and August 25^th, Feiner’s campaign raised only an additional $2,297, including 14 $100 or more donors (in contrast with the $14,700 Feiner raised during the same eight week period in 2007).   While Feiner was raising $14,867 dating back to Bernstein’s May 21^st nomination, he was also spending $44,712.  Much of this money ($15,305) went to the legal bills paid by Feiner’s campaign for the unsuccessful attempt to knock Bernstein off the Sept. ballot by challenging the validity of ballot petitions and signatures.   An additional $14,000 went toward mailing and printing costs in the past few weeks: presumably for the flyers recently sent to Greenburgh residents.   In sum, while Feiner had spent almost $30,000 more than he had raised in 2013, he still held $103,131 in campaign funds with two weeks remaining in the campaign.  (Note: of course the expenditures do not include expenses incurred but not paid or billed as of the financial disclosure date). 

With his nomination on May 21, Bob Bernstein was starting the campaign with a $132,977 financial disadvantage compared to his candidate.  Bernstein, too, appeared to get caught off-guard by his nomination and did not have his fundraising organization in place to accept contributions until June 1^st.    In his first five weeks of activity, however, Bernstein’s fundraising efforts were successful:  between June 1^st and July 11^th, the Bernstein campaign collected $28,150, including 51 donations of $100 of more.  (With a ten day head start, Feiner collected less than half that amount).    But while Feiner’s fundraising dived precipitously since early July, Bernstein’s fundraising efforts remained strong, garnering $19,875, including 87 large donors ($100 or more).   Significantly, in contrast with Berger’s donors in 2007, who included many from outside Greenburgh, nearly all of Bernstein’s large donors listed Greenburgh or 10583 zip code addresses.      While Bernstein has raised $48,025, he has also spent $35,510.  Bernstein’s largest vendor (at $23,450, or 2/3 of all expenditures) is Pivot Group, described on its website as “a voter communications firm specializing in providing direct mail, advance targeting and strategic guidance to Democratic campaigns..”  http://www.thepivot.com/wp 

Summary: as of late August, Bernstein has raised $48,025 including about 140 individual donations of $100 or more.   Feiner, by contrast, has raised $14,867 during the same period, even with a head start of about ten days.   But while Bernstein has raised $33,158 more than Feiner during this campaign, the Feiner campaign’s deep pockets have come into play, allowing Feiner to spent $44,712 (a campaign cash flow deficit of nearly $30,000) while Bernstein’s campaign has spent $35,510, or $9,202 less than Feiner.    Although Feiner has raised much less and spent significantly more than Bernstein’s campaign through August 25^th, Feiner still holds a huge financial advantage of more than $90,000, holding $103,132 in campaign funds in contrast with Bernstein’s account balance of $12,515.    

Comparison to 2007:  The 2007 campaign started three months earlier than the 2013 campaign as Berger began collecting funds in early March.  Simultaneously, Feiner energized his own fundraising. From the campaign’s start in March through the late August “11 Day Pre-Primay” reporting date, Feiner raised about $43,000 through late August ($28,000 more than in the later starting 2013 campaign season) and spent $37,288 ($7,424 less than he has already spent in the shorter 2013 campaign), ending the same period in 2007 with a cash balance of $141,687 ($38,555 more than the 2013 late August balance of $103,131).  

Berger had already started her fundraising in early March in 2007, three months ahead of Bernstein’s start date of June 1 in 2013.   By late August, Berger had raised $34,168 – not including $30,000 she loaned to her own campaign  - contrasted with Bernstein who has raised $48,025, or $13,857 more during a campaign season that has been three-months shorter than Berger’s in 2007.   Berger had also spent $57,604 by late August (running out of money in the process) , compared to Bernstein’s spending $35,510 ($22,094 less than Berger) during the same time period while also keeping his campaign solvent. 

Conclusion:  Defeating Paul Feiner cannot be accomplished by outspending Greenburgh’s twenty two year incumbent.  Bernstein’s fundraising success has been impressive and Feiner’s fundraising efforts have been surprisingly lax so far.  Nevertheless, in light of Feiner’s $132,977 head start, it is impossible in a short campaign season for Bernstein or any challenger to match Feiner’s inexhaustible financial resources.  Just to maintain his campaign spending levels to date, Bernstein cannot relax his fundraising.  The Berger campaign’s financial travails demonstrate how it is easy to run out of money when challenging Feiner.  It will be interesting watch future financial disclosure reports to see whether Feiner’s financial advantage will force another challenger’s campaign into financial distress  or if Bernstein’s campaign will continue their successful fundraising.

In contrast with 2007, the 2013 fundraising data may suggest a certain lack of enthusiasm among Feiner donors or, conversely, that the Feiner team is very confident about the Sept. 10^th primary. But, despite his calls recent calls on facebook for more money, Feiner has no deeper financial concerns other than how best to allocate his extensive resources.   Feiner’s only serious concern is whether the network of personal loyalty and name recognition he has built over two decades can turn out more than 4,000 voters on Sept. 10th.  

[Note:  Judith Beville has not submitted financial disclosures to the State of New York and is apparently not providing financial support to her co-campaign with Feiner.]