Timeline: Direct Mail Vendor Julie Roginsky’s Departure from the 2017 Murphy for Governor Campaign

The following is a timeline concerning events leading up the departure of Julie Roginsky, a former direct mail vendor for the 2017 Murphy for Governor campaign. The campaign was compelled to release this information in response to false and misleading accusations made in the press by Ms. Roginsky:

June 23: Argument with Brendan Gill stemming from disagreement on campaign decision.

June 26: Inquiry from Matt Friedman at Politico re: relationship between certain campaign

staffers and Horizon.

June 26: Roginsky reports argument to legal team. Roginsky demands that she be formally

elevated above Gill in campaign structure. Jon Berkon tries to schedule call with Roginsky, Gill,

and Paul Josephson, but Roginsky refuses to participate (1). Per campaign policy, legal team

commences investigation into Roginsky complaint.

June 26: Dan Bryan expresses concern that Roginsky leaking story to Friedman and not acting in

best interests of campaign (2)

June 27: Roginsky, PDM, and Berkon speak, hear Roginsky’s complaint re argument and

demand to be elevated above Gill.

June 27: Roginsky writes to Berkon, noting that Politico reporter told her that “someone from

within the campaign (I can make an educated guess) is saying that I am conflicted on Horizon

because of the work I do for the Middlesex Dems, who are on the other side of the issue from

Phil.” Roginsky denies this (4)

June 28: Derek Roseman cancels weekly call, following concerns about Roginsky

trustworthiness re: campaign information (5)

June 28: Notwithstanding consensus not to comment on Friedman story, Roginsky continues to

push for a statement. Gill requests that she not send (6)

June 30: Roginsky attempts to schedule senior team meeting without Gill (7)

July 1: Bryan emails Gill re: a call from Roginsky, in which she advises laying off blaming

Christie for state government shutdown. Bryan describes call as “odd” and urges Gill to

disregard advice (11)

July 1: Gill emails PDM, Berkon, and Platkin, relaying his concerns about reliability of

Roginsky advice, and noting that Steve, Matt, and Brad agree with Gill (12)

July 1: Roginsky emails Berkon/Stafford, recounting her view that Gill not coordinating with her

on strategy (15)

July 3: Roginsky writes to Gill, Platkin, and PDM, stating that she received calls from “George

and Sweeney, back to back,” and that they “have heard from several senators that either you are

directly calling members to lobby against the Horizon bill or a member of your staff is,” and that

this violates the “deal that you wouldn't weigh in directly with members and he feels betrayed.”

Roginsky requests that PDM “please call Sweeney ASAP or, if you are unable, please let me

know and I will circle back.” Platkin responds, “This is completely untrue. No one has made any

calls to lobby on this bill and I feel confident in saying that.” Brendan notes, at end of chain,

“[a]lthough worked out[,] an example of mischief and accusations.” (18)

July 4: Roginsky writes to Berkon and Ben Stafford that “McCabe told me that Gary Taffet, a

close friend of his who acts as his right hand person on political matters, received a call from

Brendan on Saturday. Brendan told Taffet that Phil would returning from Israel that afternoon

and would be calling him and Craig Coughlin, a Middlesex Assemblyman and very likely the

next speaker of the General Assembly, to tell them that their efforts to restructure Horizon were

‘unhelpful.’ Despite what Brendan said to Taffet, Phil never called.” (21). Gill denies.

July 8: Over course of several days, PDM speaks with senior staff/consultants seeking input on

how to quell the rift and move forward. Speaks with Jenny Davis on July 8.

July 9: Following call with PDM, Davis forwards Berkon two emails from Roginsky, in which

Roginsky berates Davis for not scheduling an event that her attorney,

Gerry Krovatin, wants PDM to attend (23, 29). She writes to Davis that “this is not a discussion

for Gill” and that her request “is not a suggestion.” She then writes to Davis, “I am a senior

member of this team, to say the least. I do not need to ask anyone for permission. When I ask

you to do something, which I do very rarely, I expect it to be done. If I do not have dates by

close of business today, I am going directly to Phil and I can assure you that this is not a contest I

am going to lose. Spare yourself the aggravation and please do as I have repeatedly requested.”

July 11: Derek Roseman reports to Berkon that “Julie went around the process” for getting

approvals from PDM, which had been established on July 4 in wake of earlier concerns around

Roginsky’s use of information. (36)

July 11: Roginsky sends email to Berkon saying that “we need to wrap this whole thing up” and

that “I need to figure out what to do with the rest of my life” (37). In addition to many

complaints about Gill, Roginsky offers to manage the campaign herself. Notably, Roginsky also

writes, “I never had an issue with Gill until he spoke to me the way he did.”

July 13: Gill writes email to team in which he expresses concern that “this story was planted by

Roginsky in attempt to stir up Middlesex against us. Have the story appear that it came from me,

which is why she chose the reporter she did, but did through a 3rd party which I have confirmed

as a fact, because of her ongoing problem with this reporter and her attempt to get him fired. No

one would think that Julie would give a story to Max. This continues the confusion and games

which have distracted this campaign for the last three weeks.” (39)

July 13: Ben Stafford writes to Roginsky regarding her complaint (40). Confirms that “Gill used

inappropriate and unprofessional language in the form of strong profanity,” including “variants

of ‘fuck’” and concludes that this “conduct violates the Campaign’s expectation that its

employees will, at all times, communicate professionally and courteously.” Stafford also

concludes that “Our investigation did not identify any additional interactions between yourself

and Gill of a similar nature. Given these findings, the Campaign is taking appropriate steps to

address and remedy the inappropriate conduct. Among other things, I understand that you have

now received a written apology from Gill. The Campaign’s communicated expectation is that

this conduct will not repeat.” Stafford also notes that “We recognize that you have also raised

additional concerns regarding the structure and decisionmaking process of the Campaign, and

related issues, which we consider to be a distinct matter,” and notes that there will be follow-up.

Roginsky responds, but does not allege the use of words other than variants of “fuck” and does

not contest finding that there was no pattern.

July 13: Gill writes apology to Roginsky for his language and tone during argument.

July 14: Long email dispute between Gill and Roginsky regarding Roginsky insistence that Dan

Dolbaum (data director) immediately provide her with projected mail counts (43). Gill forwards

email from Davis validate his assertion that Julie was several weeks late on providing budget

(47). In separate email with PDM, Gill notes, “Post her hijackking us in the primary for $296,000

of your money for no work product, where she admitted to me she jacked up her mark up/profit

on what was left because the overall budget had to be cut, (which isn't normal, you can check

with Rob on that) the trust level isn't high.”

July 17: PDM and Roginsky meet. Post meeting, Roginsky follows up by sending “hail mary

pass” email, in which she says “if I calm down and think about this rationally, I have known Gill

for two decades and we have been very close friends for all but three weeks of that time” and

“[h]e and I are both pretty stubborn and what occurred to me on my drive home is that one of us

should just grow up and call the other to hash this all out and move past this. I will raise my hand

to do that, if that works for you.” Roginsky then offers, “Having said that, if my being affiliated

with Middlesex freeholder and legislative campaigns has caused problems of perception for you,

I am willing to resign from the campaign to make your life easier.”

July 19: Call with Gill, Brad Lawrence, and Roginsky. Gill writes to PDM and Berkon that “She

has already communicated to Brad that she thinks the call isn't worth it and won't be fruitful.”

(51). That evening, Julie is separated from campaign.

July 19-21: After separation, Roginsky calls Berkon on July 19 and asks for assistance securing

position with DGA (53).

July 21: Roginsky complains in email that DGA plan has been leaked and that betrays

commitment made to her (54)

July 22: In close-out email, Roginsky asserts that she will “delete all [her] files.” (55)