New ‘Donors’ to Eric Adams’ Reelection Campaign Say They Never Donated

Just weeks after the Trump administration pulled off the dismissal of corrupt fundraising charges against Mayor Eric Adams, it appears that his reelection campaign was at it again, an investigation by The City has found.

The Adams campaign in May once more accepted funds from individuals who appear to be straw donors and submitted them to the city’s $8-to-$1 public matching dollars program. 

Two individuals listed by the campaign as making donations eligible for matching funds told The City that they are unemployed and did not give to Adams or any other candidate. Another contribution for which Adams sought a match was paid for by a credit card linked to the donor’s employer. Three donors listed addresses where they do not appear to live.

The City is keeping the names of alleged donors anonymous out of concerns of possible retribution.

These suspect contributions came as part of two waves of donations to the Adams 2025 campaign made in May — shortly after Adams celebrated a federal judge’s April 2 order dismissing his corruption and bribery case. 

Ten donations arrived on May 3, while seven more showed up nine days later. The 17 contributions netted Adams $35,700 and generated 16 matching-fund claims that would, if deemed eligible by the city Campaign Finance Board, add an additional $32,000 to his coffers.

If Adams’ overall public matching funds request is approved, the campaign estimated, it would obtain more than $3 million in taxpayer-funded subsidies.

All the donations were for the maximum amount allowed — $2,100 — and all were paid by credit card. Many of the donors contacted by The City do not speak English, but their donations were made through the city’s online donation system, contribute.nycvotes.org, which is posted in English only.

Ten of those donations are connected to one company, Allstar Homecare Agency in Sunset Park, Brooklyn, including several made by Allstar employees and their relatives.

In fact, most of the contributors were from people of modest means. Two reported on contribution forms they were unemployed. There were seven home health aides, who typically earn about $20 per hour, a front desk clerk, a secretary, a pre-school teacher, a hair stylist and a laundromat worker. Sixteen of the 17 donors had not donated to any New York City politician in the last two decades.

The mother-in-law of one of the donors expressed surprise at the notion that her son-in-law — who is an Allstar personal care aide — could have given thousands of dollars to Adams’ campaign.

“I find it impossible,” she said. “If you had said something like $210, I would’ve said, ‘OK, maybe!’ But $2,100? He’s really — he really has very little money. I don’t think he even makes $2,100 a month.”

Adams has insisted neither he nor his campaign have ever knowingly accepted an illegal donation, but again and again he has been shadowed by accusations of using straw donations to net the coveted $8-to-$1 public match. Straw donations are an illegal way for donors seeking clout to get around campaign contribution limits by funding multiple donations that mask the true source. 

Todd Shapiro, the campaign’s spokesperson, did not respond to The City’s emailed questions about specific suspect donations, why they were submitted for matching claims and what the campaign does to ensure they only submit eligible claims. Instead, on Wednesday he issued a general statement promising to work with the CFB to resolve any issues.

“As with any campaign receiving thousands of contributions, there may be a small number of instances requiring clarification or review,” he wrote. “In such cases, our campaign works closely and proactively with the CFB to ensure full compliance with all applicable regulations. Where necessary, donations have been voluntarily returned in accordance with CFB guidance and our longstanding commitment to transparency and integrity.”

“Mayor Adams’ campaign is on track to be fully funded and is well-positioned to compete vigorously in the general election,” he added.

The indictment filed against Adams last fall charged him with soliciting and accepting thousands of dollars of such donations. To date, an Adams’ associate and a local businessman have pleaded guilty to orchestrating straw-donors schemes, and a mayoral aide has said he plans to admit to yet another dubious donation scheme.

The Campaign Finance Board, meanwhile, continues to investigate whether the illegal donations flagged in the now-defunct indictment were limited to the ones referenced by the Manhattan federal prosecutors. In December, the CFB said its preliminary review found one-third of his 2021 matching funds claims were likely invalid. Adams won the Democratic primary nomination by just over 7,000 votes in that campaign.

The board has persistently refused to release matching funds for Adams’ 2025 campaign, citing the campaign’s continued refusal to provide requested documentation, as well as the indictment and the dubious circumstances of its dismissal.

Susan Lerner, executive director of the nonpartisan watchdog group Common Cause, called Adams’ track record of submitting invalid claims for matching funds “truly extraordinary.”

“It’s a persistent pattern, a continual attempt to game the system,” she said. “There’s a lot of pressure to raise money. Things will slip through. But this is a persistent pattern of either real sloppiness or fraud — and either one should not be awarded with public funds.”

The pattern raises serious questions about whether the mayor’s campaign is properly vetting each contribution before submitting them for matching funds as required. Only donations from New York City residents who certify that the source of the funds is their own are eligible for a public match, up to the first $250.

Last week, the board again denied the mayor’s request for matching funds, citing the campaign’s refusal to address the board’s past concerns about dozens of suspect donations and several undocumented fundraising events.

This Campaign Finance Board declined to comment on the May donations flagged by The City.

‘What donation?’

The City managed to track down several donors to ask how they had come up with such a hefty sum for the mayor, starting with husband-and–wife donors living in Sunset Park who are described as “unemployed” in contribution reports filed by the campaign with the CFB.

The couple denied donating $2,100 each to Adams and scoffed at the idea that they had that kind of money available for that purpose.

“What donation? I don’t know anything about that,” the husband said, adding that he would check with his wife. After speaking with her on the phone, he said, “This is definitely wrong. I just called my wife and she said we didn’t.

“I don’t really work. Where would I get this much money?” he added.

The contribution reports the Adams campaign filed with the CFB reveal that the billing address of the credit card that paid for both donations is different from the couple’s home address. The form requests an explanation for the difference. One report states “Out of town,” the other explains, “I’m traveling out of town.”

The billing address for the card used to pay for both donations is a home in Darien, Conn., occupied by their daughter. Reached by The City, the daughter said she paid for both donations with her credit card. She said her parents, who do not speak English, asked her to make the donations and sent her a link to do so because they could not navigate it. She said she did not know who sent them the link or if anyone asked them to donate. She later called The City back and said she had called her mother, who told her she had forgotten all about the donations.

Not only do donors need to reside in New York City to be eligible for a match; any donation where there’s a difference between the residential and credit card billing addresses automatically raises questions for the CFB about eligibility. And the online contribution portal through which these donations were made includes a checkbox where the donor swears the donation is from their own funds.

The Adams campaign submitted both of these contributions from the unemployed couple for a public match.

Campaign Finance Board officials say all credit card donations are subject to an address verification system that is supposed to verify both the donor’s home street address and ZIP code to help ensure contributions are made from permissible sources, such as individuals, rather than business entities. Corporate donations are forbidden in the city system.

If the address or ZIP code does not match what’s on file with the credit card company, the credit card backup documentation will indicate “fail” for each. A failure may raise red flags, suggesting that the credit card used could be a business card rather than a personal one, board officials say.

That’s what happened with another donation in the batch of contributions made in May.

A donor who identified herself as a home health aide at Allstar used a credit card to pay for her $2,100 contribution. The billing address of the card was Allstar’s offices in Sunset Park. She also listed that office as her home address in campaign finance filings.

Waiman Liu, Allstar’s administrator, asserted in a brief email that Allstar “and its representatives adhere strictly to all applicable campaign finance laws and regulations. We do not comment on individual donations or internal matters.” 

Liu added the agency has “no information on the contributions referenced” and does not “coordinate, encourage or reimburse political donations in any manner that violated legal standards.”

In response to The City’s inquiry about the employee’s use of the firm’s business address, Liu wrote, “Allstar did not facilitate, reimburse, or influence this contribution. [The employee] used personal funds for her donation, consistent with our strict policy prohibiting corporate political contributions. While we don’t monitor employees’ personal financial transactions, we have verified she has no corporate credit card. We are reminding all employees to ensure personal activities comply with campaign finance laws.”

Allstar has had some interaction with city government during Adams’ term. In 2023, it sought to rezone a former synagogue in Gravesend, Brooklyn, to convert it into a six-story residence with ground floors and basement set aside for an elderly day care center. The city Planning Commission — which is controlled by mayoral appointees — approved the request in May of that year.

The address verification system listed both home health aide’s “address verification” and “ZIP code verification” as “FAIL” on a contribution report obtained by The City via the Freedom of Information Act. Though this is a document the campaign would be able to review, the Adams campaign nevertheless submitted that donation for a public match.

“That raises questions in my mind: Are these business credit cards? Why would there be a difference?” Lerner of Common Cause said. “These are red flags, and the public deserves candidates who obey the law.”

The Allstar worker’s husband — who is also an Allstar employee and who also gave $2,100 on the same day using a credit card, listing his home address on Staten Island — tried to explain the use of the Allstar billing address. He claimed the card she had used belongs to her and that she used her employer’s billing address because when she first arrived in the U.S. in 2018 she didn’t have an address. He said he was not pressured to donate and did so because he believed the mayor could help alleviate issues facing racial minorities.

Asked why multiple, connected donors gave on the same day, he said they had all been together that day and were having a discussion about the donation, and came to a conclusion about it as a group. Asked if anyone reimbursed him, he responded: “No. At the end of the day, this is a personal decision.”

The contribution report of another donor who identified himself as an Allstar home health aide provided a credit card billing address in Brooklyn but a residential address in Staten Island. The Adams campaign submitted that contribution as eligible for a match. The CFB’s review is not yet available, and the donor did not respond to The City’s request for comment.

Another husband and wife who coughed up $2,100 apiece hold modestly paying jobs: he works at another Sunset Park home health firm two blocks from Allstar, while she works in a hair salon. Asked about the donations, the hair salon employee initially said that she didn’t know about a donation to Adams. “I don’t know if it’s me or my daughter,” she added.

Told that records show she and her husband are listed as Adams donors, she then said they had donated. Asked why they chose to support Adams, she replied, “I don’t really know how to explain. It sounded like he could help us if we supported him.”

Dubious history

At issue is whether Adams’ campaign was aware of these problematic donations and made any effort to vet them before using them to claim matching funds.

Asked about the donations with different billing and residential addresses, CFB officials said they review these types of discrepancies and if no valid explanation or affirmation letter is provided, the contribution is deemed not eligible for matching.

Adams has a dubious history with straw donors since his run for City Hall in 2021. During that campaign, the Campaign Finance Board flagged dozens of suspect donations and requested backup documentation from his campaign. They got no response, but ultimately approved $10 million in matching funds anyway.

Then in July 2023, CFB’s suspicions became reality when Dwayne Montgomery, one of the mayor’s buddies from his days in the NYPD, was indicted on charges of orchestrating a wide-ranging campaign to scare up straw donations to help Adams meet his public matching-funds goals. Montgomery pleaded guilty in the scheme.

Since then, The City documented multiple examples of purported contributors saying they never gave to his 2021 campaign or were reimbursed by others — including a mysterious unexplained fundraising event uncovered by The City for which the campaign has provided no backup documentation. The City exposed admitted straw donors to his 2025 campaign as well.

The drumbeat continued in November 2023 when the FBI raided the home of his chief fundraiser, Brianna Suggs, and days later confiscated the mayor’s phones. It soon emerged that law enforcement was looking into allegations that Adams helped the Turkish consulate resolve a fire safety inspection problem in exchange for suspect donations tied to the Turkish government.

In September, federal prosecutors unsealed a 57-page corruption indictment against Adams, with illegal contributions playing a central role. Prosecutors alleged he had solicited and accepted dozens of illegal straw donations, including some from sources connected to the Turkish government, in his aggressive pursuit of public matching funds for both his 2021 and 2025 campaigns.

Since then, Erden Arkan, a Turkish businessman based in Brooklyn, has pleaded guilty to choreographing a straw donor scheme for Adams, while a mayoral aide, Mohamed Bahi, has said he plans to plead guilty to a scheme that relied on a contractor with ties to the Uzbekistan government.

Brooklyn federal prosecutors are also looking into fundraisers organized by Winnie Greco, the mayor’s former liaison to the Asian community. The FBI raided her homes in early 2024. Greco recently reemerged at Adams’ 2025 campaign launch.

Throughout all of this, Adams has insisted he knew nothing of improper contributions. After his indictment was dismissed in April, he began obliquely criticizing unnamed aides he implied were responsible.

Last month, Adams fought back more strongly, filing a lawsuit arguing that once the federal corruption case was dismissed, the Campaign Finance Board no longer could justify denying him his requested matching funds. The board countered that regardless of the dismissal of the federal case, it acted appropriately because of his campaign’s continued failure to respond adequately to the board’s demand for documentation.

Two weeks ago, a federal judge tossed the case, ruling that the campaign’s non-response to CFB’s demands justified the denials of matching funds. The board’s pursuit of these documents and communications regarding dubious donations is ongoing.

Frank Carone, chairman of Adams’ re-election campaign and his former chief of staff, remains defiant, promising that the campaign plans to file a “comprehensive response” to the CFB’s denial this week and to demand it reassess its position and immediately provide the requested public dollars.

He took issue with the board’s categorization of dozens of contributions as “suspected straw donations,” stating, “You say suspected, we say full compliance and salacious unsubstantiated allegations, none of which have even alleged campaign culpability. None. Zero.”