Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Booster Fundraising topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District counsel tells school committee raffles, ‘games of chance’ must be run by 501(c)(3) groups, not the school
Summary
At its May 7 meeting the Blackstone‑Millville School Committee heard legal counsel clarify that raffles and similar games of chance are governed by state law and attorney‑general guidance and generally must be conducted by recognized 501(c)(3) organizations; counsel recommended policy edits to distinguish formal booster groups from informal parent fundraisers and to allow staff participation only in a personal, not professional, capacity.
The Blackstone‑Millville Regional School Committee heard detailed legal guidance May 7 on limits for parent and booster fundraising that include raffles, calendar draws and other ‘games of chance.’ Kelly Gonzalez, the district’s attorney, told the committee these activities are tightly constrained by law and by guidance from the attorney general.
“There are restrictions on who can host raffles and games of chance,” Gonzalez said, adding that ‘‘municipalities and public entities do not’’ qualify as sponsoring organizations for lotteries. She advised the committee that those fundraisers must generally be run by recognized charitable organizations with 501(c)(3) status that can obtain required permits and meet reporting obligations.
The discussion grew from proposed edits to district policies (including KBE, GBEDC and JJ) presented to the committee. Gonzalez and her colleague Selma said the draft language should be clarified so it does not inadvertently force every informal parent group to incorporate as a 501(c)(3) simply to run routine fundraisers such as bake sales. Instead, she recommended sequencing the policy so that the 501(c)(3) requirement applies where the activity is a raffle or other game of chance, not to every informal parent activity.
Gonzalez also recommended a narrower restriction on staff participation: employees should be barred from running such activities in their professional capacity but may participate in a personal capacity outside work hours. “Employees are barred from participating in such activities in their official capacity but may do so in a personal capacity,” she said.
Committee members repeatedly voiced concern about the administrative burden and cost of forming and maintaining a 501(c)(3) for short‑term or seasonal parent groups. Members asked counsel to propose revised policy language that would: (1) preserve the legal requirement that raffles be run by appropriate charitable sponsors, (2) make clear when a parent group is considered a formally recognized booster and thus eligible to conduct permitted games of chance, and (3) explicitly state that staff may participate only in a non‑professional, personal capacity.
Kelly Gonzalez agreed to draft suggested wording for the JJ and GBEBC policy sections and to provide that language to Interim Superintendent Jill Pilgalerani and the policy subcommittee for review.
What’s next
The committee did not adopt final policy language at the meeting. Members asked counsel to return with redrafted paragraphs that will make the distinction between formal booster organizations (eligible to run games of chance if they meet 501(c)(3) and permit requirements) and informal parent groups that may continue to fundraise through non‑chance activities (bake sales, direct donations, snack sales).
