Paul Vallone's many faux pas on citywide TV

The entire debate is on NY1 and apparently no password is needed to see it.

At 24 seconds into the 2nd segment:

Chrissy:

As we all know, Jobs For New York has endorsed you and your campaign. And they also have spent over $100K to falsely attack your opponents. Now, you and I have always talked, and you have stated publicly that you were against negative campaigning, and it's something that you would not condone. However, your spokesperson has said that you were happy and willing to accept help from anyone that was willing to give it to you. So, my question is why have you never publicly denounced the attacks, and why did you not ask Jobs For New York to stop the negative attacks on your behalf because you do not condone them?

Vallone:

Well one of the things that Chrissy and I agree on is running a positive campaign is paramount and is something that's respected and needed in our district. And one of our important messages is always to say is outside expenditures should be banned across the board. Not just any one organization - all of them. Local races should remain local. Period. What are you responsible for these days? The campaign you lead and the positive message you send out. In 2009, my first campaign, and again now in 2013, our message has never been about the other candidates - publicly at debates, publicly here, you never go after candidates. It's not what the people deserve. So my campaign is a positive message, and any outside groups should be banned from being involved in any of our local races, period.

[Basically, he refused to denounce Jobs For New York.]
Graziano:

Since you haven't denounced what Jobs For New York has done, I'm going to take a different approach, which is that you talk about community and unity as part of the main thrust of your campaign, how does that reconcile with the votes you have done at Community Board 7 - for example, when you backed Gambino crime family associates for the White House to build construction against the wishes of the community in Whitestone and the neighbors?

Vallone:

It's interesting when you can speak for Community Board 7 when you don't sit on Community Board 7. Community Board 7 overwhelmingly approved the project that Mr. Graziano is referring to. It was a manufacturing block and it was a project that everyone who was there approved. And typical to Mr. Graziano's demeanor is to come in at the last minute and cause strife. So unlike campaigns that try to segregate the community, we unite the community. And that's what leadership should do. You should talk to the community board, talk to the elected officials, not stand on the corner screaming about a story that no one wants to listen to. So if that's the approach that certain campaigns want to take, then let them take that. We are proud to work together with the community board, because we have 2 in our district - Community Board 7 and Community Board 11 and those are the areas that take control for the zoning, the elected official. For someone to say that they are single-handedly responsible for that, speaks volumes about that person.

[Graziano never said he spoke for Community Board 7, he said that the community of Whitestone was against the White House rezoning, which is proven by the above link. Paul Vallone dodged the question, but apparently got his issue confused with the Waterpointe rezoning (a contaminated Whitestone site) that his family's lobbying firm pushed for, because the White House area is not the least bit industrial.]
Duane:

As you know, I have pledged that I will be a full-time council member. Would you pledge to give up your law practice and be a full-time council member as well?

Vallone:

I will absolutely, if honored by the people of the district, be a full-time council member. That's what you have to be. That's what my father was. That's what my brother was and if I have that honor to represent the district, that's what I will do. I think that's critical, and I think that's one of the things John has pointed out over the campaign, and has Austin, to make sure 100% commitment to the City Council. That's what the people deserve in our district and that's what I pledge.

[Interesting, considering that at every debate, he refused to say he would be a full-time council member. Also interesting is that his brother, Peter, is featured as a member of the Vallone law practice, proving that he's not actually a full-time council member. Whoops!]

Shafran:

Overdevelopment from the real estate industry is one of the biggest threats to our neighborhood. Now Paul, you are a registered lobbyist for a firm that received $2.5M last year selling access to city government, for, among others, the real estate industry. You've received approximately $85K in contributions throughout your runs for the city council from the real estate industry, and as Chrissy pointed out, the biggest NYC developers have created a superPAC that spent over $250K on you and your campaign. Now we have a public finance campaign system that was put in place and which we are all a part of, that is supposed to root out the influence of special interest spending and you've taken $95K in public matching funds from that system. So my question for you is, on behalf of the taxpayers of our community, can we have our money back?

Vallone:

Well, all of the money the candidates receive are governed by the NYC Campaign Finance Board. And all of us have received the matching funds. And every one of our contributions I'm very proud of. When you spend a lifetime in the community, such as I have, you have a family in the community, small business in the community, you make a lot of friends in the community. And those are the connections and those are the people that are working with our campaign. So any type of receipt for any type of contribution to our campaign has been public. And any idea that that is somehow being kept from the people of the district is insane. In fact, what does our practice do? We're a small practice - a law firm that was started by my grandfather 80 years ago. And we do elder law and we do work in the community. That's what our community does. That's what we do.

[So Paul Vallone, of the Astoria Vallones, wants us to think that he is a lifelong resident of northeastern Queens? Wow. There's nothing he won't lie about, is there?]

Shafran:

Actually, I'm talking about the firm with which you are a registered lobbyist that made $2.5M last year selling access to city government.

Vallone:

When you are a lawyer and you provide legal services, and if a client comes to you and they also need consulting services, you must register with the City of New York.

Shafran:

So you are a registered lobbyist?

Vallone:

My father is one of the most distinguished members of the city, and he has a consulting firm. If a client comes to us and they need legal services, and they also need consulting services, by law, you must register as a lobbyist. That is what I have done. That is what the law requires and - going back to John's question - the minute that this district is honored and privileged to vote me into City Hall, all of that will end because our job will be 100% for City Council.

[WOW! Someone thinks rather highly of himself and his family!]
Shafran:

So, I do take that to mean that you are a registered lobbyist and we all know that. This campaign has been hijacked by outside spending.

[Then it becomes a free-for-all.]
At 8:24 in the second segment, Errol Louis steps in:

Louis:

If the questions you've heard so far have not been clear, let me try to focus them for you. They're saying, and we have seen, there's a lot of money that has been spent by this group, Jobs For New York. They don't talk about jobs, they don't even talk about New York. They have made personal attacks on all of your opponents. You've said earlier tonight that you don't like that sort of a theme, they would like you to say publicly that you would like them to stop doing it in the last week.

Shafran:

Which other candidates have done throughout the city.

Graziano:

Correct.

Vallone:

I started the night off by saying across the board - no outside expenditures from any group. I'm taking it beyond one group to all the groups. And if that's an answer the candidates don't like, they're just going to have to live with it.