Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Campaign Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State campaign finance office warns towns: public resources can’t be used to sway ballot‑question votes
Summary
At the Peaslee Building Committee meeting, the Office of Campaign and Political Finance told Northborough officials that appointed, paid public employees may not solicit or receive funds for ballot‑question campaigns and urged legal review before distributing election‑related materials; officials were advised how town meeting communications differ from ballot‑question rules.
Jason Tate, education director at the state Office of Campaign and Political Finance, told the Peaslee Building Committee on Feb. 24 that public resources may not be used “to influence voters” in ballot‑question elections and that appointed, compensated public employees may neither solicit nor receive funds for political purposes.
Tate walked the committee through common examples that can run afoul of the rules: using government postage, staff time, copiers or mass‑mailing systems to push advocacy; school newsletters or unsolicited emails from municipal accounts that urge a vote; and public employees reposting fundraising appeals on social media. He said such uses have produced complaints in the past and referenced the state Supreme Judicial Court’s 1978 Anderson decision as foundational to the prohibition.
The presentation clarified a key difference: information distributed for town meeting is treated differently from election‑period communications. Tate said communities that adopt chapter 53, section 18B may once distribute objective town‑meeting information using public resources (for example, a neutral red‑book style booklet of pro and con language). But he warned that material should not “look like a campaign” and recommended that towns route proposed texts through OCPF’s legal team and the State Ethics Commission before distribution.
Tate also described how ballot‑question committees organize and report. A question committee typically files an M101 form with the town clerk to name a chair and treasurer and a campaign‑finance report (M102) is due eight days before the election with a final filing 30 days after. Unlike candidate committees, question committees may accept unlimited contributions and are required to disclose activity only in those filings, he said.
Committee members raised practical questions about their status on the Peaslee Building Committee. Tate said the statutory restriction applies to appointed and compensated employees; several members said they are not compensated, and Tate confirmed that lack of compensation means the solicitation prohibition does not automatically apply to them. He repeated that elected officials may take positions and even use campaign funds on a ballot question, but they still may not use public resources to advocate.
Tate pointed attendees to OCPF’s online municipal ballot‑question toolkit and provided contact points on the agency legal team. He urged committees and school districts to send draft communications in advance for review when there is any uncertainty.
The committee thanked Tate and moved on to project business; no formal action resulted from the presentation.
