Manhattan Dems revolt vs. boss over his lobbying
ALBANY — Keith Wright, the well-connected head of Manhattan’s Democrats, could be forced to choose between his political post and his job.
Members of the borough’s Democratic Committee, upset about a backroom deal Wright cut to choose a candidate for a vacant state Senate seat, will push a resolution at a meeting Monday night that would prohibit local party officials from also working for firms that lobby.
In addition to his party chairman post, Wright (photo inset) is a lobbyist for Davidoff, Hutcher & Citron. The resolution would cover even those who weren’t actively lobbying if they work for a company that does.
“I think the intent is to make him step down,” said Arthur Schwartz, a Democratic district leader from Greenwich Village who is one of those behind the effort.
Schwartz said he believes the resolution has a real chance to pass.
“I don’t know if there’s tremendous support for Keith,” he said.
A number of Manhattan Dems were unhappy to learn in January that Wright — a former assemblyman who earlier this month was reelected to another two-year term as Manhattan Democratic Committee chairman — is working as a lobbyist or government relations specialist, Schwartz said. But their desire to oust Wright grew stronger after he cut a deal last week with Brooklyn Democratic Chairman Frank Seddio to select Assemblyman Brian Kavanagh as the Democratic candidate for an open state Senate seat — despite the 72% of Manhattan committee members who were backing activist Paul Newell. Wright had the power to decide who got the nomination, and did so in a way that ensured Kavanagh would get the backing needed to get on the ballot in the Nov. 7 special election. Wright on Sunday said he was unaware of the pending resolution to outlaw party leaders from working for lobbying firms and had no comment. Davidoff, Hutcher & Citron in the past reportedly defended its arrangement with Wright, saying “we are well aware of the restrictions of the Public Officers Law, and Mr. Wright’s activities will not run afoul of the law.” Government reform groups have called for a state ethics investigation into the matter.