I thank Betsy Fischer for her clarification regarding Jim Powell's campaign finance violations, but the question I never heard Assemblyman Powell answer, and I think he should now answer, is "if the rules were so complex, why were not all of the other candidates fined for the same violation?"
The public has the right to ask, and get a straight answer. Mentioning an APOC violation is not negative campaigning, it's called holding someone accountable for their conduct. Campaign finance is serious stuff.
On the lighter side, I was a bit intrigued by Powell rushing to his dog's defense in the interview after the election, even though no charges against his dog had yet been filed. Methinks he doth protest too much. While I have not had the pleasure of meeting Jim's dog, whom I'll call "Spike" in order to protect his privacy, my sources say "Spike" is allegedly a mutt with beady eyes, a loud bark, and questionable associations. Perhaps "Spike" should be investigated.